LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


BX  9946  .M35  1870 
Manford,  E.  1815-188A. 

A  discussion  on  universal 

salvation  and  future 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2009  witii  funding  from 

Princeton  Tlieological  Seminary  Library 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/discussiononunivOOmanf 


^j^V^^Vi 


•» 


9  • 


•  .,•    /%^    . 


.  % 


A    DISCUSSION 


Jniyei^al  Salvation 


FUTURE    PUNISHMENT, 

BETWEEN 

E.    MANFORD, 

Puhlishir  of  Manford^s  Magaxini,  Chicago, 


J.  s. Sweeney, 

PaitQT  tftht  First  CongrtgJtlon  af  DiscifUs,  Chicago. 


"  Prove  all  things;  hold  fast  tliat  which  is  good." — Paul, 


CHICAGO: 

Rand,  McNally  &  Co.,  Printers,  51   Cl.ark  Street. 

1870. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1870,  by 

E.  MANFORD  and  J.  S.  SWEENEY, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  Illinois. 


PREFACE 


There  is  a  College  in  Kirksville,  Mo.,  the  President 
of  which  is  a  Disciple,  one  of  the  Professors  is  a 
Presbyterian,  one  a  Methodist,  one  a  Universalist— 
all  ministers.  Kindly  they  had  often  canvassed  the 
points  wherein  they  differed;  and  finally  concluded  to 
have  an  Oral  Discussion  in  the  Chapel  of  the  Col- 
lege, on  Universal  Salvation  and  Endless  Punishment, 
and  secured  the  undersigned  as  the  Disputants. 

The  Discussion  was  accordingly  held,  vast  numbers 
listened  to  it  with  deep  interest,  and  the  following  pages 
contain  a  report  of  the  Debate. 

E.  MANFORD. 

J.  S.  SWEENEY. 
Chicago,  May,  1S70. 


Oral     Discussion. 


UNIVERSAL    SALVATION. 

Proposition  First.  The  Bible  teaches  that  all 
WHO  leave  this  world  sinful  will  finally  be 
reconciled  to  God,  and  saved. 

[mr.  manford's  first  speech.] 

Gentlemen  Moderators.,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  : 

We  have  assembled  to  consider  subjects  of  vast  im- 
portance to  us — to  all.  We  know  that  we  now  live,  and 
we  are  taught  by  revelation  that  we  shall  live  forever. 
Mr.  Sweeney,  my  opponent  on  this  occasion,  and  myself 
admit  this.  But  we  differ  widely,  entirely,  concerning' 
the  condition  of  mankind  on  the  other  side  of  the  River. 
He  will  affirm  in  this  discussion,  that  part  of  our  race 
will  be  doomed  to  suffer  endless  punishment,  while  I  ex- 
pect to  affirm  the  final  reconciliation  and  salvation  of 
the  world.  The  proposition  we  shall  fii^st  consider,  and 
to  which  we  shall  devote  two  days,  I  being  in  the  affirm- 
ative, reads  thus — 

The  Bible  teaches.,  that  all  -who  leave  this  world  sin- 
ful will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God^  and  saved. 


8  Oral  Discussion. 

It  will  be  observed,  that  I  do  not  affirm  Jioiv  or  when 
this  reconciliation  is  effected;  only,  "that  all  who  leave 
this  world  sinful  W\\\  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and 
saved."  I  am  fearful  that  all,  or  about  all,  the  adult  por- 
tion of  mankind  leave  this  world  more  or  less  sinful. 
The  wisest  and  best  well  know  their  imperfections  and 
shortcomings.  With  sorrow  the}''  acknowledge  that  they 
fall  far  short  of  spending  life  as  the  Master  requires,  for 
he  admits  of  no  compromise  with  sin.  "Thou  shalt 
love  the  Lord  thy  God,"  says  he,  "  with  all  thy  heart,  soul, 
and  strength,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  "  Do  unto 
others  as  you  would  have  others  do  unto  you."  "Bless, 
and  curse  not."  "  Render  good  for  evil."  "  Be  ye  there- 
fore perfect  even  as  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven  is  j^erfect." 
All  this  the  Master  requires.  This  is  the  Gospel  stand- 
ard. All  who  reach  it  are  perfect  Christians — Christlike, 
Godlike.  All  who  fall  below  are  sinners.  There  are 
grand  and  glorious  characters  in  the  world — multitudes 
of  them — but  do  the  best  reach  the  Gospel  standard.'' 
If  not,  then  "all  leave  this  world  sinful."  If  Mr. 
Sweeney  is  right,  I  do  not  see  but  all  the  adult  popula- 
tion of  this  world  are  on  the  direct  road  to  hell. 

Is  the  infant  portion  of  mankind  any  better  off  than 
the  adult.''  It  is  well  known  that  the  Catholics,  and  a 
majority  of  the  Protestants,  will  have  it,  that  children 
inherit  from  father  Adam  a  sinful  nature.  And  this  seems 
to  be  the  creed  of  Mr.  Sweeney's  church.  If  I  am  wrong 
he  will  please  correct  me,  as  I  do  not  wish  to  misrep- 
resent his  people.  Rev.  Alexander  Campbell,  a  great 
man  in  his  communion,  is  very  clear  on  the  infant  de- 
pravity question.  There  is  no  mistaking  his  meaning. 
"  Thei'e  is,  therefore,"  he  says,  "  a  siiz  of  our  nature  as  well 
as  a  personal  transgression."    "  Our  7iature  was  corrupted 


Universal  Salvation.  o 

by  the  fall  of  Adam  before  it  was  transmitted  to  us." 
''All  inherit  Vi fallen,  consequently  a  sinful  nature,  though 
all  are  not  equally  depraved."  "  Condemned  to  a  natu- 
ral death,  and  greatly  fallen  and  depraved  in  our  xvhole 
constitutiori  we  certainly  are  in  consequence  of  the  sin  of 
Adam."  Christiafz  Syste?n,  pp.  28,  29.  All  mankind, 
according  to  Mr.  Campbell,  come  into  this  world /a//c?/z, 
greatly  fallen,  depraved,  sinful.  If  this  is  correct,  all 
who  die  in  childhood  must  die  in  sin.  They  come  into  this 
world  sinful  and  must  leave  it  sinful,  if  Mr.  Campbell  is 
correct,  for  in  the  same  book  he  repeats  time  and  again, 
that  "  no  one  can  scripturally  be  said  to  be  converted  to 
God  until  he  is  immersed  in  water,"  and  he  and  his  whole 
church  discard  infant  baptism  as  an  abomination  in  the 
sight  of  God.  They  believe  in  infant  depravity,  but  not 
in  infant  baptism,  or  infant  conversion  to  God.  Children 
are  born  sinful,  live  their  brief  life  sinful,  die  sinful,  enter 
the  other  world  sinful,  and  I  do  not  see  but  they  must  be 
sinful  forever  if  conversion  to  God  is  not  allowed  in  that 
world,  and  that  is  Mr.  Sweeney's  ground.  I  call  partic- 
ular attention  to  this  point,  for  it  looks  very  much  like 
WHOLESALE  INFANT  DAMNATION.  If  the  gentleman's 
church  is  right,  all,  or  about  all,  of  Adam's  race,  infants 
and  adults,  will  be  "  gobbled  up  "  by  satan.  In  affirming, 
then,  "  that  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will  finally  be 
reconciled  to  God,  and  saved,"  I  am  advocating  the  Im- 
mortal Interests  of  mankind,  for  if  the  converse  Is  true, 
the  world  en  masse  will  go  headlong  down  to  hell. 

The  New  Testament,  as  I  read  It,  places  all  mankind 
in  three  respects  on  an  equality,  ist,  All  are  mortal, 
and  must  die;  2nd,  All  shall  live  again,  and  forever; 
3rd,  All  shall  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved. 
But  all  do  not  die  at  once;  all  are  not  raised  from   the 


lo  Oral  Discussion. 

dead  at  once ;  all  will  not  be  saved  at  once.  Salvation 
is  progressive  here  and  hereafter.  It  is  a  growth  in  grace. 
The  consummation  is  to  be  realized  in  the  fullness  of 
tijnes,  as  the  apostle  Paul  expresses  it.  And  Peter  speaks 
of  "the  times  of  the  restitution  of  all  things." 

Our  truest,  highest,  and  best  conceptions  of  God,  are 
derived,  not  from  physical  nature,  but  from  Man.  He 
is  the  offspring  of  God,  the  image  of  God,  the  type  of 
God,  and  therefore  partakes  of  the  character  of  his  parent, 
his  archetype ;  hence  Man  has  all  the  attributes  of  God  in 
a  latent  or  active  condition,  but  in  ^finite  degree.  Our 
Savior  was  a  Man — "  The  Man  Christ  Jesus  " — a  Man 
anointed  and  qualified  to  instruct  his  brethren,  mankind, 
in  the  ways  of  truth  and  righteousness,  and  thereby  save 
them.  He  was  a  perfect  Man,  a  colossal  Man,  the  wisest 
of  the  wise,  the  best  of  the  best;  hence  it  is  said  he  "was 
God  manifested  in  the  flesh,"  was  "God  with  us,"  and 
for  the  same  reason  he  said,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one." 
He  was  so  Godlike  that  a  Prophet  actually  calls  him  "  The 
Mighty  God,  The  Everlasting  Father,  The  Prince  of 
Peace."  Isa.  ix.  6.  If  we  would  know  God,  then,  we 
must  know  Man,  especially  the  Man  Christ  Jesus.  Let 
us,  then,  see  God  through  Christ — learn  the  character  of 
God,  by  learning  the  character  of  Christ,who  was  emphati- 
cally the  Image  of  God,  the  Glory  of  God,  the  Son  of  God. 

If  this  is  so — and  what  Christian  will  question  its  cor- 
rectness?— the  Old  Testament,  and  the  New  Testament, 
the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  yea,  all  God's  providences  in  all 
ages  and  climes,  must  be  interpreted  by  Christ's  Life 
and  Character.  When  properly  understood,  they  pei"- 
fectly  harmonize  with  the  Life  and  Character  of  our 
Lord  and  Master.  This  view  of  our  Redeemer  makes 
him  doubly  dear,  precious,  and  necessary  to  the  world. 


Universal  Salvation.  ii 

We  may,  then,  expect  to  learn  the  Will,  Purpose,  De- 
sire and  Pleasure  of  God  relative  to  human  destiny; 
we  may  expect  to  learn  how  the  Love  of  God,  the 
Justice  of  God,  the  Mercy  of  God,  will  dispose  of 
mankind;  we  may  expect  to  learn  how  God,  by  his  Law 
and  Government,  will  deal  with  our  race ;  we  may  ex- 
pect, I  say,  to  learn  all  this  by  studying  the  Life  and 
Character  of  Christ  as  he  was  "  God  manifested  in  the 
flesh." 

I.  What  was  the  Will  of  Christ  concerning  man's  final 
Destiny  ?  Did  he  will  our  salvation  or  damnation  ?  Did 
he  will  that  we  should  ascend  to  heaven,  or  sink  to  hell  ? 
Did  he  will  that  we  should  do  God's  will,  or  eternally 
frustate  it?  I  expect  Mr.  S.  will  admit  that  it  was  the 
will  of  Jesus  that  all  should  be  reconciled  and  saved.  All 
that  Jesus  ever  said  or  did  shows  that  the  blessedness  of 
mankind  was  the  will  of  his  soul.  "  M}-  meat,"  says  he, 
"  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  and  to  finish  his 
work."  John  iv.  34.  "  Thy  will  be  done"  was  his  con- 
stant prayer.  An  apostle  clearly  states  what  is  the 
Will  of  God.  "  God  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved  and 
come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth."  i  Tim.  ii.  4. 
This  being  the  will  of  God  it  was  the  will  of  Christ. 

The  will  of  Jesus  never  changed.  From  his  baptism 
in  Jordan  to  his  ascension  to  heaven,  under  all  circum- 
stances, among  friends  and  foes,  the  will  of  God  was  his 
will.  When  betrayed  by  a  professed  friend,  when  for- 
saken by  his  disciples,  when  being  murdered  by  a  brutal 
and  blood-thirsty  rabble,  he  w^as  true  to  the  will  of  his 
heart,  to  the  will  of  his  God,  and  hence  prayed  amid  the 
yells  of  the  mob,  "  Father,  forgive  them."  So  God's 
will  for  the  salvation  of  men  will  never  change.  It  is 
his  will  now  that  all  shall    be  saved,  and  it  eternally 


12  Oral  Discussion. 

will  be  his  will  that  all  shall  be  saved.     Will  this  be 
denied  ? 

In  perfect  harmony  with  the  unchangeable  will  of  God, 
Jesus  called  on  all  men  to  do  his  will.  "  Repent,"  cried 
he,  "when  he  began  his  -work,  "for  the  kingdom  of  God 
is  at  hand,"  "  Come  imto  me,  all  ye  that  labor  and  are 
heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest."  "  If  any  man 
thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me  and  drink."  After  his 
resurrection  he  commissioned  his  disciples  to  "  go  into  all 
the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature."  In 
the  last  chapter  of  the  last  book  of  the  Bible,  and 
almost  the  last  verse,  is  the  last  verbal  communication  of 
Jesus  to  the  world,  and  how  exactly  it  con-esponds  with 
all  he  had  ever  uttered.  "  I  Jesus  have  sent  mine  angel 
to  testify  unto  you  these  things  in  the  churches.  And  the 
Spirit  and  the  bride  say,  Come.  Let  him  that  heareth 
say,  Come.  And  let  him  that  is  athirst  come.  And  who- 
soever will,  let  him  take  the  water  of  life  freely."  Rev. 
xxii.  i6,  17.  These  words  of  Jesus  are  the  words  of  God. 
Jesus  never  revoked  them.  God  never  revoked  them. 
The  Spirit  now  cries  to  every  soul  that  God  ever  created, 
let  that  soul  be  where  it  may,  in  the  body  or  out  of  the 
body,  in  this  world  or  in  the  immortal  world,  "  Come — 
come  from  your  wanderings,  come  to  your  Father's  house 
and  he  will  joyfully  give  you  of  his  abundance."  Never, 
in  time  or  eternity,  will  a  soul  be  put  beyond  the  reach 
of  mercy.  Salvation  is  now  free  as  the  air,  free  as 
the  sunshine ;  it  ever  will  be  free  to  mankind,  whether 
they  walk  the  earth,  or  tread  the  courts  of  the  immortal 
realm.  I  know  Mr.  Sweeney  emphatically  denies  all  this, 
and  contends  equally  as  emphatically,  that  an  endless  hell 
where  mercy  will  never  be  allowed  to  enter,  is  to  be  the 
doom  of  all  who  depart  this  life  unregenerated.     But  I 


Universal  Salvation.  13 

see  no  good  reason  for  the  imperfections  of  earth  being 
perpetuated  through  the  ceaseless  ages  of  eternity. 
Would  wisdom,  goodness,  justice,  humanity,  be  sub- 
served by  immortalizing  our  Adamic  frailties  and  imper 
fections  ? 

11.  The  Purpose  of  Christ — of  God.  The  purpose  of 
Jesus  corresponded  with  his  will.  He  did  not  will  the 
salvation  of  a//,  and  purpose  the  salvation  of  part,  of 
mankind.  What  he  willed  he  purposed  to  accomplish  ; 
and  he  lived,  and  labored,  and  died  to  effect  the  purpose 
of  his  heart.  The  son  of  a  heathen  god  left  heaven,  and 
declared  in  a  most  positive  manner  —  so  mythology  says 
—  that  he  would  not  return  till  every  soul  was  regen- 
erated. So  Christ  resolved  that  God  should  be  all  in  all 
before  he  would  cease  his  reign.  See  i  Cor.  xv.  24-28. 
"And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all 
men  to  me."  John  xii.  32.  This  wonderful  declaration 
of  our  Savior  shows  distinctly  the  purpose  of  his  heart, 
the  purpose  of  his  mission.  Again  he  says,  "And  if 
any  man  hear  my  words,  and  believe  not,  I  judge  him 
not ;  for  I  came  not  to  judge  the  world,  but  to  save  the 
world."  John  xii.  47.  Substitute  mankind  for  "world" 
in  this  passage,  and  we  have  the  Saviors  meaning. 
Evidently  he  purposed  the  salvation  of  all. 

The  purpose  of  Christ  reveals  the  purpose  of  God. 
He  was  imbued  with  the  spirit  of  God's  purpose.  The 
Bible  is  radiant  \vith  this  glorious  theme.  "  Having 
made  known  unto  us  the  mystery  of  his  will,  according 
to  his  good  pleasure,  which  he  hath  purposed  in  himself, 
that  in  the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  times  he  might 
gather  together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which 
are  in  heaven,  and  which  are  on  earth,  even  in  him." 
Eph.  i.  9,  10.     It    is  the    purpose   of  God,  then,   that 


14  Oral  Discussion. 

"all  things  in  heaven  and  on  earth"  should  be  gathered 
together  in  one—on^  body,  one  fold.  The  purpose  of 
God  is  clearly  revealed  in  all  those  passages  that  speak 
of  the  intent  of  Christ's  mission.  "  For  God  sent  not 
his  Son  into  the  w^orld  to  condemn  the  world,  but  that 
the  woi'ld  through  him  might  be  saved."  John  iii.  17. 
"  We  have  seen  and  do  testify,  that  the  Father  sent  the 
Son  to  be  the  Savior  of  the  world."  i  John  iv.  14. 
Who  can  doubt  that  it  is  the  purpose  of  God  to  save 
the  world? 

The  purpose  of  Christ  was  as  unchangeable  as  his 
divine  character.  He  never  deviated  an  iota  from  the 
grand  aim  of  his  life.  What  he  was  born  to  accomplish 
he  lived  and  died  to  accomplish;  hence,  it  is  said  by  the 
apostle  Paul,  that  "he  tasted  death  for  every  majt;" 
"gave  himself  a  ransom  for  a//."  So  the  purpose  of 
God  changeth  not.  With  him,  it  is  said,  there  is  "  No 
variableness,  neither  shadow  of  turning."  Ao-ain,  "  He 
is  of  one  mind  and  who  can  turn  him.?"  Men,  beino- 
imperfect  and  short-sighted,  often  change  their  plans  and 
purposes,  but  God,  being  perfect  in  knowledge,  and  all- 
seeing,  never  changes  his  plans  or  purposes. 

Can  God's  purpose  fliil .?  Did  Jesus  foil  in  any  of  the 
purposes  of  his  life  ?  Did  he  not  on  the  cross,  cry,  "  It 
is  finished  " .?  He  had  accomplished  all  he  was  sent  to 
do  on  earth.  And  not  only  the  life  of  Christ,  but  the 
Bible  teaches,  that  God's  purposes  will  be  accomplished. 
"  The  Lord  of  hosts  hath  sworn,  saying,  surely  as  I  have 
thought,  so  shall  it  come  to  pass;  and  as  I  hscvQ pur- 
posed,  so  shall  it  stand."  "  For  the  Lord  of  hosts  hath 
purposed.,  and  ivho  shall  disannul  it  P  and  his  hand  is 
stretched  out,  and  xuho  shall  turn  it  hack  ?  "  Isa.  xiv.  34, 
27.   ''I  have  purposed  it,  I  will  also  do  it."   Isa.  xlvi.  1 1. 


Universal  Salvation.  15 

III.  Christ  desired  the  reconcihation  and  salvation  of 
mankind.  I  need  not  spend  time  in  proving  this  after 
having  showed  that  universal  salvation  was  according  to 
his  Will  and  Purpose.  Christ  not  only  manifested  this 
truth  of  God  to  the  world,  but  it  is  revealed  on  every  page 
of  the  Bible.  It  is  also  a  clear  and  certain  inference  from 
all  we  know  of  the  divine  Being.  If  God  is  Love,  and 
not  hate,  if  he  is  Good,  and  not  evil,  if  he  is  our  Friend, 
and  not  our  foe,  if  he  is  our  Father,  and  not  a  cruel  des- 
pot, he  must  desire  our  welfare.  This  was  the  perpetual 
desire  of  the  Savior;  and  that  this  desire  of  his  great 
heart  might  be  realized,  he  freely  laid  down  his  life.  He 
invited  all  to  come,  and  doomed  none  to  endless  destruc- 
tion. So  with  his  Father  and  our  Father.  As  God 
now  desires  the  salvation  of  all,  none  are  excluded,  none 
are  doomed.  Salvation  now  is  as  free  as  the  air  we 
breathe.  And  as  God  eternally  will  desire  the  salvation 
of  all,  not  a  soul  in  time  or  eternity  will  be  banished 
beyond  the  reach  of  heaven's  mercy.  God  desires  the 
salvation  of  all  now,  and  so  invites  all  to  come  and 
be  saved.  He  will  eternally  desire  the  salvation  of  all, 
and,  consequently,  he  will  eternally  invite  all  to  come  — ■ 
come  up  higher,  come  and  partake  more  and  more  of 
the  feast  of  fat  things.  Will  this  be  controverted  ?  Will 
Mr.  Sweeney  contend  that  God's  desire  will  change.'' 
That  in  the  distant  future  he  will  desire  the  endless 
misery  of  countless  millions  of  his  children  ?  Will  Mr. 
S.  turn  Calvinist.''  I  want  to  hear  from  him  on  this 
subject. 

IV.  It  was  the  Pleasure  of  Christ  that  all  should  be 
reconciled  and  saved.  It  would  be  slandering  Jesus  to 
deny  this.  As  it  afforded  the  shepherd  pleasure  to 
recover  the  lost  sheep,  the  father  delight  for  the  lost  son 


1 6  Oral  Discussion. 

to  return,  the  angels  joy  when  sinners  repent,  so  the 
Savior  was  well  pleased  when  souls  were  born  into  the 
kingdom  of  God ;  but  he  was  grieved  when  they  walked 
in  the  ways  of  sin.  So  our  heavenly  Father  hath  pleasure 
in  the  redemption  of  his  children,  and  he  ever  will 
have  pleasure  in  their  redemption.  As  it  is  pleasing  to 
him  for  sinners  to  become  saints,  he  entreats  all  to  do 
so,  and  as  it  ever  will  be  pleasing,  he  ever  will  entreat 
them  to  come  to  him  and  live.  But  Mr.  S.  will  main- 
tain, I  suppose,  that  by  and  by  it  will  afford  God  no 
pleasure  for  sinners  to  be  converted,  and  so  he  will  pro- 
hibit their  conversion,  and  delight  in  their  death  and 
damnation. 

V.  The  Love  of  Christ — of  God.  Christ  in  his 
Character  and  in  his  Life,  manifested  and  commended 
the  Love  of  God  to  the  world.  John,  whom  Jesus 
especially  loved,  bears  this  testimony,  "  Hereby  perceive 
we  the  Love  of  God,  because  he  —  Christ  —  laid  down 
his  life  for  us."  i  John  iii.  i6.  And  Paul,  commissioned 
after  Christ's  ascension,  says,  "  But  God  coimnendcth  his 
love  toward  us,  in  that  while  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ 
died  for  us."  Rom.  v.  8.  The  wonderful  love  of 
Christ  for  this  sinful  world  is  the  most  astonishing  fact 
of  history.  He  knew  that  all,  even  the  chief  of  sinners, 
were  the  children  of  God,  were  created  in  the  image  of 
God,  and  consequently  worthy  of  his  most  ardent  love. 
This  explains  the  mystery.  And  if  we  were  properly 
impressed  with  the  same,  it  would  kindle  into  a  blaze 
our  love  for  fallen  man.  But  the  belief  that  all  but  a 
select  few  are  the  children  of  satan,  and  in  the  image  of 
satan,  engenders  hatred  and  its  attendant  sins.  It  can 
have  no  other  effect.  That  is  its  legitimate  result.  This 
dosriTia  makes  countless  millions  moui^n.     It  is  the  father 


Universal  Salvation.  ly 

• 
and  the  mother  of  all  the  cruel  persecutions,  and  bloody 

wars,   that  have  cursed  the  earth,   and    blackened 
the  pages  of  history.     But  Jesus  knew  man.     He  knew 
he  was  a  child  of  God,  and  an  heir  of  heaven,  and  hence 
he  lavished  on  him  his  heaven-born  love,  and  sought  his 
salvation. 

Christ  did  not  exaggerate  the  love  of  God.  "God  is 
Love,"  writes  an  apostle,  i  John  iv.  i6.  St.  Paul  de- 
nominates him  "The  God  of  Love,"  2  Cor.  xiii.  11. 
Dr.  Payson,  a  celebrated  and  eloquent  orthodox  divine 
and  writer,  in  the  spirit  of  revelation,  thus  writes  of 
God's  love : 

"In  the  words  'God  is  Love,'  we  have  a  perfect 
portrait  of  the  eternal  and  incomprehensible  Jehovah, 
drawn  by  his  own  uneiTing  hand.  The  mode  of  expres- 
sion here  adopted,  differs  materially  from  that  usually 
employed  by  the  inspired  writers,  in  speaking  of  the 
divine  perfections.  They  say,  God  is  merciful,  God  is 
just,  God  is  holy.  But  never  do  they  say,  God  is  mercy, 
God  is  justice,  God  is  holiness.  In  this  instance,  on  the 
contrary,  the  apostle,  instead  of  saying,  God  is  loving^  or 
good^  says,  God  is  Lovk — Love  itself.  By  this  expression 
we  must  understand  that  God  is  all  pure,  unmixed  love, 
and  that  the  other  moral  perfections  of  his  character  are 
only  so  many  inodifications  of  his  love.  Thus,  his  justice, 
his  mercy,  his  truth,  his  faithfulness,  are  but  so  many 
different  names  for  his  love  or  goodness.  As  the  light 
which  proceeds  from  the  sun,  may  be  easily  separated 
into  many  different  colors,  so  the  holy  love  of  God,  which 
is  the  light  and  gloiy  of  his  nature,  may  be  separated  into 
a  variety  of  moral  attributes  and  perfections.  But  though 
separated,  they  are  still  Love.  His  whole  nature  and 
essence  is  Love.  His  will,  his  word,  and  his  works, 
are  Love,     He  is  nothing,  can  do  nothing,  but  Love  ! !  " 

Dr,  Adam  Clarke,  inspired  by  the  theme,  says : 

'■'•God  is  Love.     An  Infinite  Fountain  of  Benevolence 


1 8  Oral  Discussion. 

and  Beneficence  to  every  human  being.  He  cannot 
HATE,  because  he  is  Love!  He  causes  his  sun  to 
rise  on  the  evil  and  the  good ;  and  sends  his  rain  on  the 
just  and  the  unjust.  He  has  made  no  hiima^z  being  for 
perdition  ;  nor  ever  rendered  it  impossible^  by  any  neces- 
sitating decree,  for  any  fallen  soul  to  find  mercy.  He  has 
given  the  fullest  proof  of  his  love  to  the  whole  human 
race,  by  the  incarnation  of  his  Son,  who  tasted  death  for 
eveiy  man.  How  can  a  decree  of  absolute,  unconditional 
reprobation  of  the  greater  part,  or  a7iy  part  of  the 
human  race,  stand  in  the  presence  of  such  a  text  as  this? 
It  has  been  well  observed  that  although  God  is  holy,  just, 
righteous,  etc.,  he  is  never  called  Holiness.,  Justice.,  etc., 
in  the  abstract.,  as  he  is  here  called  Love.  This  seems 
to  be  the  essence  of  the  Divine  Nature,  and  all  other 
Attributes  to  be  only  modifications  of  this ! " 

This  is  the  character  of  him  who  gave  us  being,  and 
in  whom  is  our  destiny  now  and  forever.  That  Love 
created  this  earth,  this  universe,  and  made  man  in  the 
divine  image — made  him  immortal.  That  Love  has  never 
forsaken  the  children  of  men,  and  it  never  will  forsake 
them,  in  time  or  eternity.  Jesus  was  an  embodiment  of 
God's  Love,  and  he  never  abandoned  a  soul  to  endless 
sin  and  wo,  and  God  never  will. 

VI.  The  Mercy  of  Christ — of  God.  That  our  Sav- 
ior's Life  and  Character  were  imbued  with  the  spirit  of 
mercy,  every  reader  of  the  New  Testament  well  knows. 
When  the  disciples  would  have  fire  come  down  from 
heaven  and  destroy  those  who  were  assailing  the  Master, 
he  exhibited  his  merciful  spirit  by  saying  to  the  former: 
"  Ye  know  not  what  spirit  ye  are  of.  The  Son  of  man 
came  not  to  destroy  men's  lives  but  to  save  them."  He 
had  compassion,  had  mercy,  for  the  ungrateful  men  who 
sought  his  ruin.  He  would  save^  not  destroy  them. 
That  is  the  spirit  of  God.  When  the  erring  woman  was 
brought  to  Jesus  for  him  to  condemn,  he  had  mercy  on 


Universal  Salvation.  19 

her,  and  said,  "  I  do  not  condemn  thee.  Go  and  sin  no 
more."  That  also  is  the  spirit  of  God.  When  he 
approached  Jerusalem,  full  of  wicked  men — his  persecu- 
tors, and  future  murderers — for  the  last  time,  he  uttered 
no  maledictions,  breathed  no  words  of  wi'ath,  but  his 
merciful  soul  was  moved  to  its  depths,  and  the  historian 
relates,  that  "  when  he  came  near,  he  beheld  the  city,  and 
WEPT  OVER  IT,  and  said,  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  thou 
that  killest  the  prophets,  and  stonest  them  which  are  sent 
unto  thee,  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children 
together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her 
wings,  and  ye  would  not."  They  had  insulted  him, 
slandered  him,  persecuted  him,  and  were  about  to  crucify 
him,  yet  he  had  mercy  on  them,  and  had  come  to  that 
city  on  purpose  to  die  for  its  inhabitants.  That,  too,  is 
the  spirit  of  God. 

The  Bible  is  all  aglow  with  statements  of  God's  mercy. 
"Unto  thee,  O  Lord,  belongeth  mercy T  Ps.  Ixii.  12. 
His  mercy  is  great.  "  Thy  jjiercy  is  great  unto  the 
heavens."  Ps.  Ivii.  10.  'Very  great.  "  Let  me  fall  now 
into  the  hands  of  the  Lord,  for  \ cry  great  are  his  mercies." 
I  Chron.  xxi.  13.  It  would  he  great ^  very  great  mercy 
to  bless  eternally  all  his  children,  but  very  little  mercy  to 
bless  a  fe~ju  and  endlessly  damn  the  7Jiany.  Plenteous., 
rich  in  mercy.  "The  Lord  is  mercifzcl  and  gracious, 
slow  to  anger,  and  plenteozis  in  mercy."  Ps.  ciii.  8. 
"Who  is  rick  in  mercy."  Eph.  ii.  2.  This  harmonizes 
with  the  fact  that  he  will  bless  all.,  but  refutes  the  decla- 
ration that  he  will  eternally  curse  millions.  Tc7ider 
and  impartial.  "  His  tender  mercies  are  over  all  his 
works"  Ps.  cxiv.  9.  This  accords  with  the  truth  that 
he  will  kindly  regard  all  forever,  but  refutes  the  dogma 
that  he  will  be  the  eternal  foe  of  multitudes.     Sure  mer- 


20  Oral  Discussion. 

cies.  "  I  will  make  an  everlasting  covenant  with  you, 
even  the  sure  mercies  of  David."  Isa.  Iv.  3.  There 
need  be  no  doubt  about  it ;  it  is  as  sure  as  that  God  lives. 
Now  and  forever  we  can  depend  on  the  mercy  of  God. 
God  delights  in  mercy.  "  He  retaineth  not  his  anger, 
because  he  dcUghteth  in  mercy T  Micah  vii.  18.  As  he 
is  unchangeable,  he  always  will  delight  in  mercy. 
Eternity  will  not  reveal  the  day  when  God  will  not 
delight  in  being,  merciful  to  all.  But  if  he  will  eternally 
curse  millions,  will  he  delight  in  being  merciful  to  them  'i 
His  mercy  Is  zinending.  "  His  mercy  endureth  forever." 
Ps.  cvi.  I.  Can  all  this  precious  testimony  concerning 
God's  mercy  be  reconciled  with  endless  punishment  for 
the  sin  of  this  brief  life.^ 

VII.  The  Justice  of  Christ — of  God.  JesUs  in  the 
New  Testament  Is  tei'med  "  The  Holy  One,  and  the  Just," 
"  The  Just  One."  Even  Pilate,  though  he  condemned 
Jesus,  said  he  was  a  "Just  person,"  and  his  wife  called 
him  a  "Just  man."  Herod,  likewise,  who  sought  his 
destruction,  admitted  "  He  was  a  just  man."  Christ  said 
of  himself,  "  My  judgment  is  just."  The  justice  of  Jesus 
was  the  justice  of  God,-  for  "  In  Christ  dwelt  all  the  full- 
ness of  the  Godhead  bodily,"  hence  it  is  said  of  God, 
"Just  and  right  are  his  ways."  Isa.  xl v.  21.  "Just  and 
true  are  thy  ways,  thou  King  of  saints."  Rev.  xv.  3. 
"  Shall  mortal  man  be  more  just  than  God  ? "  Job  iv.  17. 
"Justice  and  Judgment  are  the  habitation  of  thy  throne." 
Ps.  Ixxxix.  14. 

God  then  Is  just.  Infinitely,  eternally,  universally  just. 
Just  in  himself,  just  to  each  of  mankind,  just  to  all. 
What  does  justice  demand?  That  all  eri'ors  and  wrongs 
shall  be  corrected.  The  justice  of  parents  demands  the 
obedience  of  their  children.     The  justice  of  a  state  de- 


Universal  Salvation.  21 

mands  the  loyalty  of  all  its  citizens.  The  justice  of  God 
demands  universal  love,  obedience  and  faithfulness.  'It 
requires  that  "  Every  valley  shall  be  filled,  and  every 
mountain  and  hill  shall  be  brought  low^ ;  that  the  crooked 
shall  be  made  straight,  and  the  rough  w^ays  smooth ;  and 
that  all  flesh  shall  see  the  salvation  of  God."  Luke  iii. 
5,  6.  And  the  voice  of  the  Lord  will  cry  in  the  wilder- 
ness till  this  result  shall  be  attained.  It  shall  be  so,  said 
Jesus ;  it  shall  be  so,  said  the  prophet  he  quotes. 
«^'^  Parents,  states,  alwavs  demand  loyalty — never  satisfied 
without  it.  God  does^nd  will  eternally  demand  loyalty 
— will  not  be  satisfied  without  it.  He  has  not  placed, 
and  he  never  will,  in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come, 
a  soul  where  he  cannot  be  loyal  to  him ;  because  now 
and  forever  God  requii^es  universal  loyalty.  \Time 
expired. 

[mr.  Sweeney's  first  reply.] 
Getitlemejt  Afoderators,  Ladies  and  Gejitlemen : 

I  agree  with  my  friend  Mr.  Manford  that  the  subjects 
we  have  assembled  to  consider  are  of  vast  importance  to 
us  all.  We  shall  have  no  discussion  about  that.  Nor 
are  we  likely  to  have  any  about  the  fact  of  our 
eternal  existence.  For,  that  we  shall  all  exist  forever 
I  presume  we  agree.  We  shall  differ  inainly  as  to  what 
shall  be  the  condition,  in  the  future,  of  such  persons  as 
"  leave  this  world  sinful."  Mr.  Manford  has  engaged 
to  prove  that  they  will  all  "  finally  be  reconciled  to  God, 
and  saved ; "  and  you  are  here  to  hear  him  do  it.  I  am 
here  to  see  how  he  does  it. 

The  gentleman  seems  somewhat  "  fearful  that  all,  or 
about  all,  the  adult  portion  of  mankind  leave  this  world 


22  Oral  Discussion. 

more  or  less  sinful;  "  and  it  would  seem  that  Mr.  Camp- 
bell has  led  him  into  serious  doubts  as  to  whether  "  the 
infant  portion  of  mankind  is  any  better  off  than  the 
adult."  So  I  suppose  we  are  to  understand  that  he  is 
here  to  prove  that  the  veiy  best  of  the  adult  portion  of 
mankind,  and  all  infants,  will  finally  be  reconciled  to 
God  and  saved,  as  well  as  those  who  will  not  be  recon- 
ciled and  saved  in  this  life !  But  I  shall  insist  on  reliev- 
ing him  of  a  portion  of  this  work  at  the  outset.  /^Some 
persons  are  reconciled  to  God  and  saved  in  this  world,  jy-^^m 
and  hence  do  not  leave  it  sinful.  ^Vs  to  the  salvation  of 
these  he  need  give  himself  no  trouble.  As  to  the  salva- 
tion of  such,  though  they  may  leave  this  world  imper- 
fect, I  raise  no  question.  Then,  as  to  infants  he  need 
not  give  himself  the  slightest  bit  of  trouble.  They  will 
all  gotojieaven.  They  have  in  this  world  some  imper- 
fection of  nature,  it  is  true,  but  they  are  not  sinful  in 
anysense  that  will,  in  my  view,  jeopardize  their  happi- 
ness in  the  future  life.  The  Roman  Catholics  may,  I 
grant,  have  taught  some  things  respecting  infants 
unwarranted  by  the  Scriptures;  and  so  may  have  Pro- 
testants. Mr.  Campbell,  too,  may  have  said  some  things 
about  hereditary  depravity  unsupported  by  Scripture. 
But  "what  of  all  that?  Is  Mr.  M.  really  here  to  prove 
that  little  infants  will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God  and 
saved  ?  Of  course  I  raise  no  question  as  to  the  shrewd- 
ness of  the  attempt  to  mix  up  the  goats  with  the  sheep 
and  lambs;  but  I  shall  seriously  insist  t|iat  the  gentleman 
meet  the  simple  issue  fairly  and  squarely.  Everybody 
here  knows  just  who  are  meant  by  "  all  who  leave  this 
world  sinful."  That  phrase  was  not  meant  to  include 
christians  and  infants.  Let  us  then  have  no  dodging. 
Let  the  gentleman  come  up  to  the  work  squarely  and 


Universal  Salvation. 


23 


bravely,  and  so  maintain  before  this  people  his  reputation 
as  a  debater.  The  gentleman  is  here  to  prove  the  final 
reconciliation  and  salvation  of  persons  differing  almost 
infinitely  from  infants.  If  his  proposition  is  an  honest 
one,  it  means  by  "  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful "  to 
include,  esjatcially  persons,  in  scripture  style,  called 
"  Dogs,  and  sorcerers,  whoremongers,  and  murderers, 
and  idolaters,  and  whosoever  loveth  and  maketh  a  lie." 
It  afiirms  that  such  persons,  leaving  this  world  so,  "  will 
finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved."  There  are 
many  persons,  we  know,  who,  right  in  the  blaze  of 
Gospel  light^  live  and  die  sinful;  and  it  is  of  the  future 
reconciliation  and  salvation  of  such  that  many  of  us 
have  serious  doubts.  If  Mr.  M.  can  prove  that  such 
characters  will,  in  the  future,  or  "  over  the  River,"  as  he 
has  it,  be  reconciled  to  God  and  saved,  I  will  give  up 
as  to  the  rest  of  mankind,  and  we  will  close  the  debate. 
"  Salvation,"  the  gentleman  tells  us,  "  is  progressive, 
here  and  hereafter."  "All  do  not  die  at  once ;  all  are 
not  raised  from  the  dead  at  once ;  all  will  not  be  saved 
at  once."  Will  he  be  so  kind,  now,  as  to  tell  us  what 
he  means  by  "  raised  from  the  dead  " .?  I  am  curious  to 
hear  from  him  on  this  point.  If  by  "  raised  "  he  means 
anything  like  what  people  generally  mean  wl^n  speak- 
ing of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  I  am  ready  to  admit 
his  assertion;  and  shall  begin  just  there  to  upset  his 
whole  theory  of  universal  salvation.  Does  he  mean  that 
there  will  be  two  resurrections ;  one  of  the  just,  and  one 
of  the  unjust  ?  Or  does  he  really  mean  that  thei"e  will 
be  as  many  resurrections  as  there  shall  be  persons  to  die .'' 
— a  resurrection  every  time  a  person  dies  ?  It  would  be 
quite  an  accommodation  to  me,  and  I  am  sure  it  would 
help  on  our  discussion  greatly,  for  him  to  give  us  a  sharp 
definition  at  this  point.     Will  he  do  it.^ 


24  Oral  Discussion. 

In  one  sense,  salvation  is  progressive  here,  I  grant; 
but  who  knows  about  the  "  hereafter  "  ?  All  men  "  are 
not  saved  at  once "  here,  I  know.  Indeed,  some  utterly- 
refuse  to  be  saved  here,  and  that  such  will  be  saved 
hereafter  at  all^  is  more  than  I  know ;  and,  with  defer- 
ence to  all,  I  think  it  is  what  no  man  has  any  sufficient 
authority  to  preach. 

The  gentleman  has  something  to  say  of  man,  as  made 
in  the  image  of  God,  and  of  Christ  as  a  man,  even  a 
"  colossal  man,"  a  "  perfect  man,"  "  the  best  of  the  best; " 
"  and  hence  it  is  said  he  was  God  manifested  in  the 
flesh,  God  with  us."  Now,  I  call  attention  to  this, 
mainly  to  say  tliat  I  fail  to  see  the  "  hence."  I  have 
never  learned  that  Jesus  was  called  God  simply  because 
he  was  a  "  colossal  man."  Therefore  I  am  not  prepared 
to  say,  with  my  worthy  opponent,  that  "  This  view  of 
our  Redeemer  makes  him  doubly  dear."  But  then  I 
fully  agree  with  him,  that  from  Christ  Jesus  "we  may 
expect  to  learn  the  Will,  Purpose,  Desire  and  Pleasure 
of  God  relative  to  human  destiny."  And  this  brings 
me  to  the  first  argument: 

I.  "  What  was  the  Will  of  Christ  concerning  man's 
final  destiny  }     Did  he  will  our  salvation  or  damnation .'' " 

I  am  ready  to  answer  that  he  willed  our  salvation, 
present  and  future.  He  came,  too,  to  do  his  Fathei-'s  will, 
and  taught  his  disciples  to  pray,  "  Thy  will  be  done." 
And  so  we  should  pray.  So  far  as  the  Father's  will  de- 
pended upon  Jesus  for  its  performance  it  was  done ;  but 
is  it,  by  men.,  "  done  in  earth  as  it  is  done  in  heaven  " .? 
When  I  am  convinced  that  it  is,  then  will  all  my  con- 
ceptions of  heaven  be  utterly  confounded.  But  to  show 
what  the  will  of  God  concerning  human  destiny  is,  the 
gentleman  read  Paul's  language  to  Timothy  — "  Who 


Universal  Salvation.  25 

will  have  all  men  to  be  saved,  and  to  come  unto  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth."  Now,  if  this  is  an  argument, 
it  evidendy  has  one  silent  premise.  To  make  it  an 
argument  it  must  be  shown  that  all  things  whatsoever 
God  wills,  in  the  sense  of  the  text,  will  certainly  be 
accomplished.  ■  Jesus  came  to  do  the  will  of  God,  and  he 
did  it.  But  God  wills  that  men  should  obey  him,  even 
as  he  is  obeyed  in  heaven.  This,  however,  is  not  done. 
Mr.  Manford  will  hardly  say  it  is.  So  ftn  as  God's  will 
depends  upon  man  for  its  performance,  I  am  sorry  to 
say,  it  is  not  always  done.  And  this  is  a  fact  that  my 
friend  will  find  continually  and  most  stubbornly  opposed 
to  his  theory;  and  while  he  may  think  it  "  only  so  much 
the  worse  for  the  fact,"  I  incline  to  think  it  will  prove 
so  much  the  worse  for  his  theory. 

The  gentleman  says,  "  It  is  his  will  now  that  all  shall 
be  saved,  and  it  eternally  will  be  his  will  that  all  shall 
be  saved."     Yes,  it  is  his  will  now  that  all  should  be 
saved,  and  yet,  all  are  not  saved  —  some  refuse  to  be 
saved.     Why  may  not  some   be  unsaved   to  all  eternity 
for  the  same  reason  that  they  are  unsaved  now }     But, 
what  "  eternally  will  be  "  God's  will  I  am  not  prepared 
to  speak  so  positively  as  some  do.     That 's  more  than 
I  know :    and,  with  all    possible  deference   to   my  dis- 
tinguished opponent,  I   am  more  than  half  inclined  to 
say  it  is  more  even  than  he  knows.     But,  as  I   have 
already  shown,  even  if  it  shall  be  so,  what  of  it }     God 
does   not  will   concerning  man   as  he  does  concerning 
rocks  —  does  not  govern  mind   as  he   does  matter.     But 
it  cannot  be  shown  that  God  never  will  abandon  a  will- 
ful sinner,  either  by  scripture  or  reason. 

But,  as  expressive  of  the  will  of  God,  my  friend  cited 
the  last  chapter  of  Revelations  —  "The  Spirit  and  the 
3 


26  Oral  Discussion. 

bride  sav,  come.  Let  him  that  heareth  say,  come.  Let 
him  that  is  athirst  come.  And  "v^diosoever  will,  let  him 
take  the  water  of  life  freely  "  —  and  informed  us  that 
"Jesus  never  revoked  these  words.  God  never  revoked 
them."  I  agi*ee  ^vith  him  that  this  grand  invitation  to 
men  has  never  been  "  revoked."  But  in  this  same 
chapter  we  learn  that  the  time  shall  come  when  the 
Judge  of  all  will  pronounce  this  sentence  —  "  He  that  is 
unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still :  and  he  that  is  filthy,  let 
him  be  filthy  still."  And  because  this  terrible  sentence 
is  to  be  pronounced,  all  heaven,  and  the  good  of  earth, 
say  to  the  sinner,  "^  come."  But  my  friend  tells  him 
God  always  will  say  "  come."  I  say  the  invitation  will 
be  "  revoked  "  when  God  shall  say,  "  He  that  is  filthy, 
let  him  be  filthy  still."  Still  I  Still!!  How  long 
does  that  mean .''  And,  by  the  way,  when  the  Judge  of 
the  universe  shall  have  decided  that  men  have  eflfectually 
resisted  his  love,  and  all  his  invitations,  and  shall  have 
said,  "  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still,"  it  will 
avail  little  for  any  poor  puny  man  to  stand  up  and  say, 
"/can  see  no  good  reason  for  the  imperfections  of  earth 
being  perpetuated  through  the  ceaseless  ages  of  eternity," 
even  though  he  should  mildly  call  it  "  immortalizing 
our  Adamic  frailties  and  imperfections." 
IL  "The  Purpose  of  Christ— of  God." 
As  no  power  outside  of  himself  can  stay  his  hand,  it 
follows  that,  when  God's  purposes  depend  alone  upon 
himself  for  their  performance,  they  will  never  fail. 
Hence,  it  is  written.  "  For  the  Lord  of  hosts  hath  pur- 
posed, and  who  shall  disannul  it  "i  and  his  hand  is  stretched 
out,  and  who  shall  turn  it  back.^"  And,  "I  have  pur- 
posed it,  I  will  also  do  it."  These  scriptures  I,  of  course, 
believe  as  devoutly  as  my  opponent  does.     Let  him  show 


Universal  Salvation.  27 

that  God  has  purposed  the  reconcihation  and  salvation 
of  all  men  with  an  absolute  purpose,  depending  for  its 
performance  only  upon  himself,  and  it  will  be  something 
to  his  purpose.  Has  he  shown  this  ?  Can  he  do  it  ?  I 
fearlessly  say,  he  cannot.  He  cites  Paul's  language  to 
the  Ephesians — "  Having  made  known  unto  us  the  mys- 
tery of  his  will,  according  to  his  good  pleasure,  which  he 
hath  purposed  in  himself,  that  in  the  dispensation  of  the 
fulness  of  times  he  might  gather  together  in  one  all 
things  in  Christ,  both  which  ai'e  in  heaven  and  which 
are  on  earth,  even  in  him." 

It  would  be  difficult  to  show  conclusively  that  this  pas- 
sage teaches  anything  more  than  the  purpose  of  God  to 
gather  together  in  one  place  all  things  that  are  in  Christy 
whether  they  be  now  in  heaven  or  on  earth;  but,  will- 
ing to  allow  my  friend  all  he  can  claim  as  to  its  teach- 
ing, I  will  grant  that  the  gathering  together  means 
reconciliation  and  salvation — thus  making  it  teach  the 
reconciliation  and  salvation  "  of  things  in  heaven  " — and 
that  it  applies  to  all  mankind.  And  then  what  have  we .'' 
why,  simply  that  God  made  known  to  the  Apostles  the 
mystery  of  his  will,  that  thereby  "  he  might  gather 
together  in  one  " — or  might  reconcile  and  save  all  men. 
But  does  it  certainly  follow  that  all  men  will  be  recon- 
ciled and  saved .''  I  think  not.  Let  us  hear  Paul  on  this 
subject :  "  God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  unto 
himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto  them;  and 
hath  committed  unto  us  the  word  of  reconciliation. 
Now  then  we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as  though  God 
did  beseech  by  us;  we  pray  in  Christ's  stead,  be  ye 
reconciled  to  God."  3  Cor.  v.  19,  20.  God  beseeches 
men,  and  by  the  Apostolic  ministiy,  frays  men  to  he 
reconciled  to  him.     And  this  shows  clearly  that  God's 


28  Oi'al  Discussion. 

purpose  to  reconcile  all  things  to  himself  depends  for  its 
accomplishment  somewhat  upon  the  persons  to  be  recon- 
ciled, and  that  it  is  not  an  absolute  purpose  depending 
only  upon  God  for  its  accomplishment,  as  my  friend  must 
assume,  to  make  an  argument  from  the  purpose  of  God. 
Some  men  refuse  to  be  reconciled  to  God  and  saved,  and 
God  does  not  reconcile  and  save  such.  Will  he  ever 
change.'*  No.  Then  who  can  prove  from  the  purpose 
of  God  that  all  will  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved .'' 

It  is  true  that  God  sent  Jesus  "  to  be  the  Savior  of  the 
world ;  "  but  it  is  equally  true  that  he  does  not  save  all 
in  this  world.  And  the  reason  he  does  not  save  some  is 
that  they  refuse  to  be  saved,  and  this  may  be  the  reason 
they  are  not  saved  to  all  eternity.  Some  live  under  the 
light  of  the  Gospel  in  this  world,  and  are  not  saved,  but 
"  leave  this  woiid  sinful."  And,  now,  my  friend  is  in 
need  of  a  passage  that  says  Jesus  was  sent  to  be  the 
Savior  of  such  as  leave  this  world  sinful,  and  that  he  will 
save  them  any  how.  It  is  just  at  this  point  that  his 
proposition  is  most  pitcously  crying  out  for  help.  And 
I  think  all  its  cries  will  be  vain. 

III.  "  Christ  Desired  the  reconciliation  and  salvation 
of  all  men." 

Yes;  but  men  have  lived  and  died  sinful — have  "  left 
this  world  sinful " — notwithstanding  they  kneiu  Christ 
"  desired "  their  reconciliation  and  salvation.  His 
"desire"  did  not  reconcile  and  save  them,  so  long  as  we 
had  any  account  of  them.  Will  he  change,  and  recon- 
cile and  save  men  who  leave  this  world  sinful  as  he 
would  not  while  they  were  in  this  world,?  Does  my 
friend  believe  in  a  changeable  Savior.? 

The  gentleman  quite  eloquently  says — "If  God  is 
love  and  not  hate,  if  he  is  good  and  not  evil,  if  he  is  our 


Universal  Salvation.  29 

friend  and  not  our  foe,  if  he  is  our  father  and  not  a  cruel 
despot,  he  must  desire  our  welfare."  And  I  think  he  was 
most  undoubtedly  correct,  as  well  as  eloquent.  God 
does  "  desire  our  welfare."  But  some  refuse  to  fare  well, 
though  God  has  made  all  necessary  provision  for  them. 
Some  remain  in  this  world  sinful  as  long  as  they  can, 
and  then  leave  it  sinful,  knowing  all  the  time  that  God 
desires  their  welfare.  Now,  let  the  gentleman  find  a 
passage  of  scripture  that  speaks  of  their  welfare,  where 
they  go  when  they  leave  this  world  sinful.  I  will  not, 
now,  trouble  him  to  tell  us  where  they  go ^  sinful.  It 
would  be  shocking  to  ask  him  to  say  they  go  to  heaven 
sinful;  and  as  he  has  no  future  hell  in  his  creed,  he 
would  fall  under  the  necessity  of  making  an  entirely  new 
survey  of  the  universe,  to  find  a  place  for  "  all  who  leave 
this  world  sinful,"  and  that  would  consume  more  time 
than  I  want  him  to  devote  to  a  little  matter  of  that  sort 
at  this  stage  of  our  discussion.  Therefore,  I  only  ask 
him  to  point  out  the  scripture  that  speaks  of  the  future 
reconciliation  and  salvation  of  such.  If  he  knows  of 
such  scripture  he  should,  for  the  sake  of  all  interests,  let 
us  have  it.  But  he  wants  to  know  if  I  believe  God  will 
change  "  in  the  distant  future,  and  will  desire  the  endless 
misery  of  countless  millions  of  his  children?"  Cer- 
tainly not.  Such  a  thought  never  once  entered  into  my 
mind.  I  know,  however,  that  millions,  if  not  countless 
millions,  of  such  persons  as  Mr.  Manford  calls  "his 
children,"  are  miserable  in  this  world ;  and  yet  it  has 
never  entered  my  mind  that  this  is  so  because  God  desires 
it.  Well,  if  countless  millions  of  "  God's  children  "  sin, 
and  are  consequently  miserable  in  this  world,  though  he 
all  the  time  desires  their  obedience  and  happiness,  how 
will  it  go  with  such  when  they  leave  this  world  sinful,  if 
God  chancre  not.^ 


30  Oral  Discussion. 

IV.  "  It  was  the  Pleasure  of  Christ  that  all  should  be 
reconciled  and  saved."  "  And  it  would  be  slandering 
Jesus  to  deny  this." 

God  has  no  pleasure  in  wickedness,  but  wickedness  is^ 
notwithstanding.  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of 
the  wicked,  but  the  wicked  die,  notwithstanding.  God, 
and  Christ,  and  Angels,  and  all  good  people,  are  "  pleased 
to  see  sinners  become  saints ;"  but  all  sinners  who  know 
this,  do  not  become  saints.  Many  of  them,  on  the  con- 
traiy,  "  leave  this  world  sinful."  My  friend  wants  to 
know  if  I  believe  that  "  God  will  by-and-by  prohibit  their 
conversion."  Certainly  not.  Does  Mr.  M.  believe  God 
will  by-and-by  compel  their  conversion  ? 

V.  "  The  Love  of  Christ— of  God." 

The  gentleman  thinks  the  "  Love  of  Christ  the  most 
astonishing  fact  in  history,"  and  I  will  allow  it.  The 
story  of  God's  love  for  man,  even  sinful  and  miserable 
man,  beggars  all  human  language.  The  story  of  Christ's 
love  for  sinners  can  never  be  told  in  words.  Let  sinners 
behold  him  in  the  Garden  of  Gethsemane,  up  the  hill, 
and  on  the  cross,  and  then  say  who  can  tell  the  story  of 
his  love  in  words.  I  think  my  friend  slightly  wrong, 
however,  when  he  says,  "Jesus  knew  man  was  a  child  of 
God^  and  an  heir  of  heaven^  and  hence  he  lavished  on 
him  his  heaven-born  love,  and  sought  his  salvation." 
The  Bible  affords  no  such  representation  of  the  case. 
Jesus  knew  man  was  not  a  child  of  God,  was  not  an  heir 
of  heaven,  but  was  lost^  was  perishing  in  his  sins,  "  and 
hence  he  lavished  on  him  his  heaven-born  love,  and 
sought  his  salvation^ 

Then  the  gentleman  refers  to  the  "  belief,  that  all  but 
a  select  few  are  the  children  of  Satan,  and  in  the  image 
of  satan" — and  says  "  it  engenders  hatred  and  its  attend- 


Universal  Salvation.  31 

ant  sins."  Well,  I  say  that  all  who  do  his  will  are 
children  of  Satan,  and  bear  his  moral  image.  So  Christ 
taught.  Did  it  "  engender  hatred  and  its  attendant  sins" 
in  him  ?  Will  Mr.  Manford  deny  that  those  who  do  his 
will  are  children  of  the  Devil,  and  bear  his  moral  image 
in  their  lives.'' 

But  he  says:  "That  love  has  never  forsaken  the  child- 
ren of  men,  and  it  never  will  forsake  them,  in  time  or 
eternity."  But  I  submit  that  it  is  pretty  hard  for  poor 
weak  mortals  to  tell  just  what  may  or  may  not  happen 
"  in  eternity."  Even  my  opponent  will  admit,  to-day, 
that  eternity  includes  quite  aiuhllc.  We  may  speak 
more  positively  of  things  of  tunc.  The  love  of  God 
does  not  save  every  body  in  time,  we  know,  for  many 
"  leave  this  world  sinful."  Will  the  love  of  God,  itself, 
save  such  in  eternity.''  Here  we  should  like  to  have  a 
litde  good  authority.  But  just  here,  alas!  is  where  Mr. 
Manford's  authority  fails  liim. 

VI.     "  The  Mercy  of  Christ— of  God." 

This  argument  is  already  answered  in  what  I  have  four  or 
five  times  repeated.  I,  of  course,  accept  all  the  scriptures 
the  gentleman  quoted,  which  speak  of  the  mercy  of  God. 
But  God's  mercy,  of  Itself  never  reconciled  and  saved  a 
single  soul.  Notwithstanding  God's  mercy,  many  live 
sinful,  and  die  and  leave  this  world  sinful.  Will  God's 
mercy  take  such  persons  to  a  heaven  they  seemed  to 
despise  as  long  as  we  had  any  account  of  them  } 

But,  speaking  of  mercy,  did  it  ever  occur  to  my  worthy 
opponent  that  Universalism  has  no  such  thing  as  mercy 
in  it?  If  I  understand  it,  Universalism  is  as  destitute  of 
mercy  as  it  is  of  grace,  and  as  utterly  destitute  of  both 
as  it  is  of  truth.  It  teaches  that  every  man  must  be 
punished  for  all  his  sins.     This  I  understand  to  be  one 


32  Oral  Discussion. 

of  the  very  pillars  of  the  Temple  of  Universallsm.  But 
if  I  am  wrong,  he  can  show  it;  if  I  am  right,  where 
then  is  the  mercy  of  Universalism?  No  one  is  saved 
from  any  punishment  in  this  life,  as  every  one  must 
suffer  all  the  punishment  due  him  for  all  his  sins;  and, 
of  course,  no  one  will  be  saved  from  any  punishment  in 
the  fiiture  life,  for  Universalism  teaches  that  there  is  none 
there  to  be  saved  from.  It  puzzles  me,  therefore,  not  a 
little,  to  luiderstand  how  Mr.  Manford  can  speak  so 
eloquently  and  pathetically  of  that  to  which,  if  his  theory 
is  correct,  he  certainly  is  not,  and  never  can  be,  debtor 
to  the  amount  of  one  farthing  . 

But  I  believe  in  a  merciful  God,  and  a  merciful  and 
faithful  High  Priest.  In  the  matter  of  a  sinner's  recon- 
ciliation and  salvation,  however,  there  are  other  things 
besides  mercy  to  be  considered.  God  is  noxv  merciful, 
but  men  are  not  all  reconciled  and  saved.  God,  if  he 
changes  not,  may  always  be  merciful,  and  yet  some 
remain  unreconciled  and  unsaved. 

VII.  "  The  Justice  of  Christ— of  God." 
I,  of  course,  accept  in  their  fulness  of  meaning  all  the 
scriptures  the  gentleman  read,  touching  the  Justice  of 
God,  and  of  Christ.  But  he  asks,  "  What  does  Justice 
demand } "  and  answers,  "  That  all  errors  and  wrongs 
shall  be  corrected."  This  answer  Is  obviously  evasive. 
Has  justice  ever  demanded  that  a  willful  sinner  shall  be 
forced  to  reconciliation  and  salvation?  Will  it  ever 
demand  this?  If  not,  how  can  any  man  argue  the  cer- 
tain reconciliation  and  salvation  of  all  men  from  the 
justice  of  God.'*  "Justice  of  states,"  we  are  told, 
"  requires  loyalty  of  their  subjects."  But  what  If  some 
nvill  7tot  be  loyal .^  Shall  they  be  subjugated.''  and  is 
that  reconciliation  and  salvation  } 


Universal  Salvation.  -i-r 

But  we  are  told,  "  God  has  not  placed,  and  he  never 
will,  in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come,  a  soul  where 
it  cannot  be  loyal  to  him."  But  "  souls"  are  somtimes 
found  where  God  never  "  placed  "  them.  A  man  may- 
place  himself  where  God  never  would  have  placed  him. 
Will  my  friend  deny  this.'* 

I  believe  I  have  noticed  all  the  gentleman's  arguments. 
I  might  have  done  so  in  much  less  time,  and  much  fewer 
words.  I  might,  very  properly,  have  grouped  the  whole 
seven  together.  The  answer  to  one  is  the  answer  to  all 
of  them.  But  I  have  chosen  to  notice  them  separately. 
[  Time  expired, 

[mr.  manford's  second  speech.] 

You  have  heard  my  friend's  reply  to  my  first  speech.  I 
will  first  give  it  due  attention,  and  then  proceed  to  offer 
additional  arguments  in  the  affirmative  of  the  proposition 
before  us.  It  seems  that  he  admits  the  endless  existence 
of  all  mankind  —  some  to  live  in  heaven  forever,  and 
some  in  hell  forever.  In  that  respect  he  differs  from 
many  of  his  brethren,  for  hosts  of  them  contend  with 
immense  zeal,  that  all  who  "  leave  this  world  sinful "  will 
be  annihilated,  soul  and  body.  That  is  surely  an  awful 
theory;  but  it  is  infinitely  better  to  burn  that  doomed 
class  of  our  race  up,  than  to  burn  them  eternally.  My 
friend's  church,  1  am  happy  to  say,  seems  to  be  a  fro- 
gresslve  church.  It  is  fast  giving  up  the  terrible  dogma 
of  the  endless  burning  of  those  for  whom  Christ  died, 
and  falling  in  with  the  milder  view,  that  they  will  be 
burned  to  ashes.  But  I  trust  that  it  will  not  stop  in  the 
ashes  theory^  but  move  onward  and  upward  into  the  full 
blaze  of  gospel.light  and  love,  and  finally  rest  in  the  glori- 


34  Oral  Discussion. 

ous  hope  of  the  redemption  of  humanity.  So  may  it  be. 
But  Mr.  S.  does  not  rank  with  the  progressive  wing  of 
his  church.  He  beheves  in  the  old-fashioned  doctrine  of 
endless  hell  torments^  and  is  doing  all  he  can  to  save  his 
church  from  subscribing  to  the  notion  that  God  by-and- 
by  will  make  an  ash  heap  of  the  majority  of  his  children. 
Either  view  is  unspeakably  dishonorable  to  God.  The 
pile  of  ashes  would  be  an  eternal  monument  of  God's 
folly  and  cruelty,  and  the  walls  of  hell  would  proclaim 
forever  and  ever  to  the  astonished  universe,  the  infinite 
malignity  of  their  builder. 

Yes,  it  is  my  business  to  prove  that  "  all  who  leave  this 
world  sinful  will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved," 
and  I  thank  God,  that  he  has  furnished  such  a  cloud  of 
witnesses,  that  this  will  be  the  result  of  making  man  in 
the  adorable  image  of  the  Most  High.  If  none  enter 
the  heavenly  kingdom  but  those  who  arc  regenerated  in  this 
world,  alas  for  nearly  all  mankind !  Most  of  them  will 
have  to '  walk  the  plank,'  if  that  partial  dogma  is  true.  It 
is  a  soul-chilling,  and  heart-rending  thought.  No  won- 
der Henry  Ward  Beecher  says,  he  "  dare  not  think  of 
hell."  If  that  doctrine  is  true,  most  of  the  brave  and 
noble  dead  of  all  ages  and  climes  are  this  moment  in 
hell.  Nearly  all  the  patriots  who  laid  down  their  lives 
in  three  wars  to  save  this  country  are  now  blowing  the 
flames  of  perdition  as  a  reward  for  their  heroic  deeds,  for  it 
will  not  be  contended  that  they  were  all  regenerated  in 
tliis  world. 

I  showed  in  my  first  speech,  that  nearly  all  mankind 
leave  this  world  more  or  less  sinful  —  die  unprepared  for 
the  purity,  life,  and  bliss  of  heaven — and  Mr.  Sweeney 
admits,  that  even  those  who  are  termed  "the  saved" 
may  leave    it  '-'■  imperfccV  —  imperfect,  of  course,    in 


Universal  Salvation.  35 

christian  character.  If  so,  they  are  not  entirely  recon- 
ciled to  God,  are  not  perfectly  Sdived  in  this  world  ^  to 
an  endless  hell,  then,  they  must  go,  if  he  is  right.  I 
also  showed  that  Mr.  Campbell  contends,  that  all  ifi- 
fants  are  born  sinful^  and  my  friend  is  careful  not  to 
say  he  discards  that  notion.  I  infer  from  his  little  eva- 
sion here  that  he  and  his  church  are  of  the  same  opinion. 
As  they  all  deny  the  possibility  of  infant  conversion,  I 
do  not  see  that  one  infant  can  possibly  be  saved  in  this 
world  or  the  world  to  come,  if  they  are  correct.  Put 
this  and  that  together  and  behold  the  result,  ist.  All 
infants  are  born  sinful.  3nd.  Infant  regeneration  is  a 
humbug.  3rd.  No  one  who  leaves  this  world  sinful  can 
be  saved.  These  propositions  certainly  involve  the 
damnation  of  all  who  die  in  childhood.  He  says,  "in- 
fants will  all  be  saved."  But  how  can  that  be,  if  they  are 
sinful,  and  cannot  be  regenerated .''  Some  light  is  much 
wanted  right  here.  If  God  will  save  infants,  who  are 
'"'•fallen.,  greatly  fallen^  depraved^  sinful^^  as  Mr.  Camp- 
bell asserts,  without  regeneration  in  this  world,  and  so 
die  in  a  sinful  condition,  then  he  will  save  one-third  of 
mankind  who  leave  this  world  sinful.  If  he  will  save 
one-third  of  our  race  who  die  sinful,  may  he  not  save 
more?  may  he  not  save  all?  Mr.  S.  says,  that  the  words 
"  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful "  "  were  not  meant  to 
include  christians  and  infants."  If  the  former  are  "  im- 
perfect" in  christian  character,  and  the  latter  "  sinful," 
the  words  were  meant  to  include  both  classes.  Again,  my 
friend  says,  "  Is  Mr.  M.  here  to  prove  that  little  infants 
will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God  and  saved  }  "  If  they  are 
"  sinful  and  greatly  depraved,"  they  are  7iot  "  reconciled 
to  God  and  saved,"  and  so  they  are  the  very  ones  I  am 
to  show  will  finally  be  saved.     "Dogs,  sorcerers,"  etc. 


36  Oral  Discussion. 

surely  need  salvation;  and  Jesus  came  to  save  them, 
according  to  the  gospel  I'ecord.  He  came  to  save  the 
"  lost,"  the  "  dead,"  the  "  chief  of  sinners."  He  came 
\.o  save  \h(t\x\  —  not  damn  them.  My  opponent  intimat- 
ed that  I  contend  that  God  v\^ill  force  men  to  be  recon- 
ciled to  God.  He  must  know  that  is  a  misstatement. 
But  it  would  be  more  Godlike  to  force  men  into  heaven 
than  into  hell.  It  is  better  to  force  men  into  the  right 
direction  than  the  wrong  direction.  It  is  preached,  that 
God  forces  men  into  this  world  "sinful  and  greatly 
depraved ;"  ybrce^  them  into  graves  dug  by  the  sin  of 
Adam;  WiW  force  them  to  the  bar  of  an  enraged  deity; 
y/viW  force  them  into  hell,  dii\d  force  them  to  lie  down  in 
death  and  destruction  forever  and  ever.  That  is  called 
sound  preaching,  gospel  preaching.  But  if  it  is  intimated 
that  the  grace  of  God  will  ultimately  regenerate  all 
souls,  a  howl  loud  and  long  goes  up  from  ten  thousand 
pulpits,  and  we  are  charged  with  teaching  that  God  will 
force  men  into  heaven!  Truly,  the  spirit  of  Christ  is 
much  needed  in  this  world.  What  the  gentleman  says 
about  the  resurrection  will  be  attended  to  in  due  time. 

All  he  says  concerning  the  Will,  Desire,  Mercy, 
Pleasure  and  Love  of  Christ,  of  God,  will  now  be  care- 
fully considered.  He  admits  that  Heaven  loves  all  sinners 
now,  his  mercy  extends  to  all  sinners  now,  that  he  wills 
and  desii*es  the  salvation  of  all  sinners  now;  and  that 
consequently,  truth  and  virtue,  life  and  salvation,  are  free 
to  all  sinners  now.  I  go  a  step  further,  and  assert  that 
truth  and  virtue,  life  and  salvation,  will  be  free  to  all 
ETERNALLY,  for  the  Same  reasons  that  they  are  free  to  all 
fioijo — for  the  same  reasons  exactly.  Now,  if  God  will 
at  some  future  period  put  part  of  mankind  where  they 
cannot  receive  the  truth,  cannot  be  righteous,  cannot 


Universal  Salvation.  37 

partake  of  life  and  salvation,  but  be  compelled  to  sin 
and  suffer  and  die  eternally,  then  his  love  will  change^ 
his  mercy  will  change^  his  desire^  will  and  pleasure  will 
change,  and  Mr.  S.  contends  that  God  will  thus  situate 
a  vast  multitude  of  mankind.  Christ  then  will  be  no 
longer  Christ,  and  God  will  be  no  longer  God,  but  both 
will  be  metamorphosed  into  fiends.  This  is  worse  than 
atheism,  it  is  diabolism.  But  the  Bible  teaches  that  God 
is  unchangeable.  "  I  am  the  Lord,  and  change  not." 
"He  is  of  ONE  mind,  and  who  can  turn  him.^"  But, 
says  my  friend,  God  is  unchangeable.  Then  he  surely 
will  not  perpetuate  sin,  depravity,  death,  damnation,  hell, 
forever.  He  chains  none  to  the  car  of  satan  7io"Jo,  he  will 
not  hereafter.  He  locks  none  up  in  hell  now.,  he  will 
not  in  the  future.  Salvation  is  now  free  to  the  "  lost," 
the  "  dead,"  "  the  chief  of  sinners,"  it  will  be  free  as 
long  as  souls  are  in  those  conditions.  If  in  the  future 
world  God  will  not  permit  a  soul  to  be  regenerated,  I 
want  the  reason.,  the  scripture  for  it. 

I  do  not  affirm,  that  God's  will,  pleasure  and  desire, 
are  done  at  all  times,  and  in  all  places  in  this  world. 
Mr.  S.  will  please  remember  that  during  this  discussion. 
But  I  do  affirm,  that  as  God  is  unchangeable,  all,  eter- 
nally, will  have  opportunities  equal,  at  least,  to  those 
they  have  here.,  to  grow  wiser  and  better.  Let  him 
remember  that  too,  for,  unfortunately,  he  is  very  forget- 
ful on  that  point.  That  is  the  argument  from  the  will, 
pleasure,  and  desire,  of  God.  As  my  friend  denies 
emphatically,  earnestly,  the  correctness  of  tliis  deduction 
from  the  character  of  God,  it  is  for  him  to  prove  that  he 
is  right,  and  I  am  wrong — if  he  can.  Let  him  address 
himself  to  this  task.  I  shall  press  this  point  on  his 
attention  all  through  this  discussion.     Let  him  refute  it. 


38  Oral  Discussion. 

or  yield  the  field.  It  is  an  old  Orthodox,  Catholic,  Mor- 
mon, Pagan  and  Savage  dogma,  that  all  who  die  unre- 
generated  have  no  chance  whatever  of  salvation;  that 
nothing  but  sin,  darkness,  death,  damnation,  are  provided 
for  such.  Hell  is  crammed  full  of  such  commodities, 
and  its  victims  are  doomed  by  the  God  of  Love  to  feast 
on  that  horrid  diet  eternally.  Love,  mercy,  goodness, 
charity,  are  all  shut  out  of  hell,  and  locked  up  in  heaven. 
And  this,  it  is  said,  is  all  done  by  him  "  Who  is  good 
unto  ALL,  and  his  tender  mercies  are  over  all 
his  WORKS."  This,  in  my  estimation,  is  a  monstrous 
error.  Let  Mr.  S.  show  it  to  be  the  truth  of  God — if 
he  can. 

The  gentleman  says,  "  It  is  God's  will  now  that  all 
should  be  saved,  and  yet  all  are  not  saved — some  refuse 
to  be  saved.  Why  may  not  some  be  unsaved  to  all 
eternity,  for  the  same  reason  they  are  unsaved  now  ? " 
But  all  can  be  saved  now^  salvation  \sfree  to  all  now^ 
even  to  the  vilest  of  the  vile,  because  there  is  a  God  who 
is  good;  and  as  there  always  will  be  a  God  of  goodness, 
all  ever  can  be  saved.  That  is  my  position ;  and  that  is 
exactly  what  he  denies.  Let  him  prove  that  the  God  of 
love  will  compel  all  who  die  unregenerated,  to  sin  and 
suffer  forever — if  he  can.  He  can  easier  prove  that  God 
will  be  annihilated.  Again,  he  says,  "  But  what  eternally 
will  be  God's  will,  I  am  not  prepared  to  speak  so  posi- 
tively as  some  do.  That's  more  than  I  know."  But  he 
is  very  positive  on  that  subject.  He  is  very  positive,  that 
after  awhile  God  will  will  the  eternal  sinfulness  and 
wretchedness  of  all  who  die  unregenerated.  He  wills 
their  conversion  now,  but  as  soon  as  the  other  world 
opens  to  the  vision  of  those  who  pass  the  grave  uncon- 
verted, their  damnation  is  sealed  by  the  divine  will.     He 


Universal  Salvation.  39 

does  not  like  to  say  that  in  plain  English.  It  is  too 
horrible  to  utter  without  circumlocution,  but  that  is  the 
sum  of  his  reasoning. 

According  to  Mr-.  Sweeney,  all  those  precious  invita- 
tions of  the  divine   Spirit,  abounding  in  the   Bible,   to 
erring  rnen  to  abandon  the  ways  of  folly,  and  walk  in 
virtue's  ways,  are   all   to   be  revoked.      They   will    no 
longer  be  required.^  no  longer  be   ■po'rjiitted.,  no  longer 
have   an   opportunity.^   to   be  virtuous,   and    then    they 
will  be  damned  forever,  for  not  doing  what   they  will 
not  be   allowed   to  do!      And  he  even  attempts  to  sus- 
tain such  a  ten-ible   notion  by  the  words  of  the   blessed 
Jesus.       He   cites    this    passage,    "He    that    is    unjust, 
let  him  be   unjust   still;  and   he   that   is  filthy,  let  him 
be  filthy  still,"     Rev.  xxii.  1 1 .     This  sentence,  he  thinks, 
will  be  pronounced,  at  a  great  judgment  day  in  the  dis- 
tant future,  on  all  who  die  unregenerated.     A  brief  exam- 
ination  of  this  passage  will   show   the  absurdity  of  his 
application.     The  verses  immediately  before^  and  imme- 
diately after  this  passage  read  thus,  "  And  he  saith  unto 
me,  seal  not  the  sayings  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book,  for 
the  TIME  IS  AT  HAND."     "  And  behold,  I  come  quickly." 
Eighteen   hundred    years  ago,   then,   the   time  was   AT 
HAND  when  the  passage  he  cited  was  to  be  fulfilled.     It 
was  then   to   take  place  quickly.      According   to   my 
learned  friend,  "at  hand"  and   "quickly"  mean   several 
thousand  years.     Webster's  Dictionary  should  be  revised 
if  Mr.    Sweeney   is  right.     The  passage  clearly  has  no 
reference  to  his  judgment  day,  has  no  reference  to   the 
future  world.     But  even  if  it  does  refer  to  the  end  of  time, 
as  he  supposes,  it  will  have  to  be  altered  before  it  will 
sustain  his  cause.     "Let"  will  have  to  be  changed  to 
shall.,  and  "  still"  to  eternally.     The  gentleman  will  have 


40  Oral  Discussion. 

to  prove,  that  "  quickly  "  and  "  at  hand  "  mean  several 
thousand  years,  that  "let"  means  shall,  and  "-still" 
means  eternally,  before  the  passage  will  contain  one  par- 
ticle of  evidence  that  God's  blessed  invitations  to  sinners 
to  cease  doing  evil,  and  learn  to  do  good,  will  ever  be 
abrogated. 

I  am  requested  to  "point  out  the  scripture,  that  speaks 
of  the  future  reconciliation  and  salvation  of  sinners." 
The  good  book  abounds  with  such  testimony.  Some  of 
it  has  already  been  presented,  and  more  will  be  adduced 
from  time  to  time. 

All  through  his  speech  he  assumes,  that  because  some 
die  unconverted,  their  endless  damnation  is  sure.  With 
equal  sense  he  might  assume,  that  because  some  are  not 
converted  at  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  their  damna- 
tion is  sure.  God's  mercy  and  saving  grace  are  not 
restricted  to  any  age^  or  worlds  ox  place.  That  is  one  of 
the  most  precious  truths  of  the  Bible.  God  is  an  omni- 
cient  Spirit.  His  love,  wisdom,  justice,  mercy,  are  man- 
ifested here  and  every  where,  now  arjd  forever. 

.  "I  cannot  go 
Where  Universal  Love  not  smiles  around, 
Sustaining  all  yon  orbs,  and  all  their  suns; 
From  seeming  evil  still  educing  Good, 
And  better  thence  again,  and  better  still, 
In  infinite  progression.      But  I  lose 
Myself  in  Him,  in  Light  ineffable !  " 

Away,  then,  with  the  error,  that  the  love  and  mercy 
of  the  august  Being  whose  presence  fills  infinity,  are 
all  expended  in  regenerating  a  few  souls  on  this  little 
spot  of  the  boundless  universe  of  the  infinite  God.  It  is 
amazing  that  a  christian  minister  should  entertain  such 
partial,  such  contracted  notions  of  the  Builder  and  Gov- 


Universal  Salvation.  41 

ernor  of  the  universe.  O  my  friend,  sit  at  the  feet  of 
Jesus,  and  learn  better.  It  is  true,  that  many  die  sin- 
ners. But  God  does  not  die  when  sinners  die;  neither  is 
he  transformed  into  a  fiend  wlien  sinners  die.  He  still 
lives  and  loves ;  his  arms  of  mercy  are  still  extended,  and 
a  new  robe  is  ever  ready  for  the  penitent.  "  This  day 
shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise,"  he  says,  to  every 
repentant  soul. 

The  gentleman  tells  us,  that  the  reason  why  Jesus  so 
loved  sinners  was,  he  knew  they  were  not  heirs  of  heaven, 
were  not  children  of  God,  but  rather  the  children  of 
satan.  If  Christ  loved  the  children  of  an  orthodox  devil, 
he  must  have  loved  their  father^  the  devil  himself.  If 
sinners  are  really  the  children  of  such  a  devil,  they  are  all 
devils  themselves,  for  children  always  partake  of  the 
nature  of  their  parents.  If  the  devil  is  the  father  of 
sinners,  they  come  into  this  world  through  the  agency  of 
satan,  and  are  his  offspring  from  their  birth.  If  the  devil 
is  totally  depraved,  his  infant  children  are  totally  depraved. 
This,  perhaps,  is  what  Mr.  Campbell  means  when  he 
says,  that  children  are  sinful.  According  to  our  friend's 
luminous  exposition,  Jesus  fell  in  love  with  the  devil's 
offspring,  and  is  trying  to  smuggle  them  from  their  right- 
ful owner.  Banish  such  folly  from  your  mind,  from 
your  creed,  from  your  heart.  All  mankind  are  God's 
children.  Jesus  tells  sinners  to  pray,  "  Our  Father  who 
art  in  heaven."  Jesus  told  his  disciples,  soon  after  he 
selected  them,  that  they  should  love  their  enemies,  "  That 
ye  may  be  the  children  of  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven."  God  was  then  their  Father,  and  of  course, 
they  his  children,  yet  Christ  told  them  to  do  something, 
that  they  might  be  his  childrot.  This  is  the  explanation. 
God  was  their  Father,  they  were  his  children,  but  their 

4 


42  Oral  Discussion. 

moral  character  was  not  yet  Godlike,  hence  they  were  not 
God's  children  characteristically^  morally.  So,  all  sinners 
are  children  of  God  by  natuj'c,  but  not  so  morally.  But 
when  they  observe  the  law  of  love,  they  are  his  morally, 
as  well  as  by  nature,  and  it  was  the  mission  of  Jesus  to 
transform  our  character  into  the  divine  image,  and  there- 
by make  us  God's  children  morally. 

He  tells  us,  that  "  God's  mercy  of  itself  never  saved  a 
soul."  But  it  is  through  his  mercy  that  salvation  is 
attained,  and  as  long  as  he  is  a  merciful  God  salvation  will 
be  possible.  God  is  now  merciful,  and  souls  are  being  born 
into  the  kingdom  of  God.  God  eternally  will  be  merci- 
ful, and  souls  will  continue  to  be  born  into  the  kingdom 
of  God,  till  God  shall  "be  all  in  all." 

But  God  has  no  mercy  if  he  deals  with  all  Justly — so 
teaches  my  zealous  friend. ,  He  seems  to  think,  that 
justice  and  mercy  are  deadly  enemies.  That  all  mercy 
is  at  the  expense  of  justice,  and  all  justice  at  the  expense 
of  mercy.  Where  he  got  his  theology  I  do  not  know. 
The  fact  that  God  deals  justly  in  punishing  men  fully,  is 
given  in  the  Bible  as  an  evidence  that  God  is  merciful. 
"  Unto  thee,  O  Lord,  belongeth  mercy,  for  thou  renderest 
to  every  man  according  to  his  works."  Ps.  Ixii.  12. 
The  fact  that  he  punishes,  is  proof  of  his  mercy.  But 
according  to  our  brother  here,  the  fact  that  God  punishes 
is  positive  proof  that  God  has  no  mercy.  The  mercy  of 
God  does  much  for  us  noxu^  and  will  do  much  for  us  for- 
ever, even  if  God  does  "  render  to  every  man  according 
to  his  works."  His  mercy  has  given  us  a  soul  and  a 
body  of  wonderful  faculties.  Has  given  us  this  earth  to 
inhabit,  and  yonder  heavens  to  behold.  Has  given  us 
friends,  and  all  the  blessings  of  this  life.  Has  given  us 
knowledge  of  him,  and  of  our  duty  and  destiny.     Has 


Universal  Salvation.  43 

made  us  immortal  beings,  to  become  purer,  wiser  and 
better  forever.  All  these  blessings  are  the  gifts  of  divine 
mercy.  But  let  my  friend  remember,  that  the  fact  that 
sinners  receive  all  the  punishment  justice  demands,  does 
not  entitle  th^m  to  any  of  the  blessings  I  have  named. 
Those  blessings  are  gifts  of  our  Heavenly  Father.  But 
punishment  is  merciful  because  it  is  administered  for  a 
benevolent  purpose. 

Speaking  of  my  argument  from  the  Justice  of  Christ 
— of  God,  he  inquires,  with  wonderful  simplicity,  "  Has 
justice  ever  demanded  that  a  wilful  sinner  shall  ho.  forced 
to  reconciliation  and  salvation } "  Nonsense.  Has  this 
man  had  "fifty  battles  and  fifty  victories,"  as  his  brethren 
say,  and  still  ask  such  a  foolish  question  as  that.''  I  do 
not  believe  that  any  one  will  be  forced  into  heaven  or 
hell.  I  inquired,  "What  does  justice  demand .'*"  and 
answered,  "  That  all  errors  and  wrongs  shall  be  corrected." 
That  he  calls  an  evasion.  No  sir.  It  is  the  true  answer. 
His  view  evidently  is,  that  justice  requires  that  errors  and 
wrongs  shall  grow  worse  and  worse  forever.  Because 
one  commits  errors  and  wrongs  here,  he  seems  to  think 
justice  demands  that  he  be  compelled  to  grow  worse 
and  worse  eternally.  A  singular  idea  of  justice!  But 
then,  he  continues,  after  remarking  that  I  said  that  gov- 
ernments require  their  citizens  to  be  loyal,  "  What  if 
some  will  not  be  loyal.'*  Shall  they  be  subjugated .''  And 
is  that  reconciliation  and  salvation.?"  Certainly  it  is. 
The  South  was  disloyal,  but  it  was  subjugated,  and  saved 
from  destruction,  and  is  now  pretty  well  reconciled. 
We  have  seen  that  God  punishes  the  disloyal  for  a  mer- 
ciful purpose — that  they  may  be  subjugated,  reconciled 
and  saved. 

The  purpose  of  God.     My  good  friend  admits,  to  use 


44  Oral  Discussion. 

his  words,  "When  God's  purposes  alone  depend  on 
himself  for  their  performance,  they  will  never  fail." 
That  sounds  about  right.  Now  turn  to  the  passage  I 
quoted  in  my  speech,  and  you  will  fiiad  that  to  be  the  exact 
chai-acter  of  the  purpose  of  God  concerning  mankind.  I 
will  again  read  it.  "  Having  made  known  unto  us  the 
mystery  of  his  will  according  to  the  good  pleasure  which 
he  hath  pui-poscd  in  himself."  Let  us  pause  a  moment. 
He  admits  that  when  God's  purposes  depend  on  himself 
they  are  sure  to  be  performed.  This  purpose,  Paul  says, 
God  has  purposed  in  himself — not  in  man  or  his  works, 
mind  you — but  in  himself- — in  his  own  infinite  power, 
wisdom  and  goodness.  Well,  what  has  God  purposed  in 
himself  to  do.''  The  next  verse,  "That  in  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  fulness  of  times  he  might  gather  together  in 
ONE  ALL  THINGS  IN  Christ,  both  which  are  in  heaven, 
and  which  are  on  earth;  even  in  him."  Eph.  i.  9,  10. 
This  God  has  purposed  in  himself,  and  Mr.  S,  admits, 
that  such  a  purpose  is  always  -perfoi'ined.  He  tries  to 
mystify  the  word  might  in  this  passage,  but  is  careful 
not  to  tell  us  what  it  means.  I  will  cite  t\vo  or  three 
passages  where  the  vs^ord  occurs.  "For  to  this  end 
Christ  both  died,  and  rose,  and  revived,  that  he  might 
be  the  Loi^d  both  of  the  dead  and  living."  Rom.  xiv.  9. 
Is  it  not  certain  that  he  is  the  Lord  of  the  dead  and  liv- 
ing.'' "For  this  cause  was  the  gospel  preached  also  to 
them  that  are  dead,  that  they  might  be  judged."  i  Peter 
iv.  6.  Was  not  the  judgment  sure.''  "Wherefore  in  all 
things  it  behoved  him  to  be  made  like  unto  his  brethren; 
that  he  might  be  a  merciful  and  faithful  High  Priest." 
Heh.  ii.  17.  Is  there  any  doubt  about  Christ  being  a 
faithful  High  Priest.''  So  with  the  might  connected- 
with  the  purpose  of  God.     He  has  puiposed  in  himself 


Universal  Salvation. 


45 


that  all  things  in  heaven  and  on  earth  might  be  gathered 
together  in  one,  and  it  will  be  sure  to  be  done.  This  is 
God's  unalterable  and  eternal  purjoose,  and  he  employs 
ample  means  to  accomplish  it.  *•'  What  he  hath  pur- 
posed he  will  perform."  The  passage  does  not  read,  that 
it  is  "  the  purpose  of  God  to  gather  together  in  one  place 
all  things  that  are  in  Christ"  as  Mr.  S.  understands  it. 
But  that  all  things  iit  heave?t  and  on  earth  might  be  gath- 
ered together  in  Christ — baptized  in  his  spirit,  which  is 
the  true  baptism,  the  "  one  baptism."  We  do  not  say,  that 
men  will  be  saved  "  anyhow,"  as  the  gentleman  inti- 
mates. That  one  baptism  is  for  all;  and  no  one  can  be 
saved  in  this  world  or  any  other  world,  without  that 
baptism. 

Before  I  close  I  will  offer  some  additional  arguments 
for  the  salvation  and  reconciliation  of  the  world. 

VIII.  God  is  the  Governor  of  mankind.  This  I 
presume  will  not  be  disputed.  The  Psalmist  says,  "  The 
Lord  reigneth;  let  the  earth  rejoice;  let  the  multitude  of 
isles  be  glad  thereof"  Ps.  xcvii.  i.  All  rulers  have  a 
specific  object  in  view,  and  that  object  corresponds  with 
the  character  of  the  ruler.  Some  are  puffed  up  with 
vanity,  and  only  seek  their  own  selfish  ends.  God  being 
a  wise  and  benevolent  Ruler,  seeks  the  good  of  his  sub- 
jects— mankind.  As  his  character  will  never  change,  he 
will,  at  all  times  and  in  all  places,  seek  the  good  of  all. 
This  truth  beautifully  harmonizes  with  the  doctrine  of 
impartial  grace,  and  accords  with  no  other  system. 
Well  might  inspiration  sing,  "The  Lord  reigneth;  let 
the  multitude  of  isles  be  glad."  Yes,  all  have  infinite 
reasons  to  be  glad  that  such  a  God  reigns.  He  reio-ns 
in  wisdom,  in  love,  in  merc}^,  in  justice.  If  we  are 
rebellious,  he  punishes — punishes  wisely,  benevolently, 


46  Oral  Discussion. 

justly.  Not  because  he  hates  us,  not  to  ruin  us,  but 
because  he  loves  us,  and  to  make  us  obedient  subjects. 
True,  there  is  evil  in  the  world,  but  Goodness  is  on  the 
Throne,  and  it  is,  and  will  be,  overruled  for  good,  and 
will  finally  end. 

•'  Give  evil  but  an  end — and  all  is  clear! 

Make  it  eternal — and  all  things  are  obscure  ! 

And  all  that  we  have  thought,  felt,  wept,  endured, 

Worthless.      We  feel  that  e'en  if  our  own  tears 

Were  wiped  forever,  no   true  cheer 

Could  to  the  yearning  bosoms  be  secured 

While  we  believed  that  sorrow  clung  uncured 

To  any  being  we  on  earth  hold  dear. 

Oh,  much  doth  life  the  sweet  solution  want 

Of  all  made  blest  in  for  futurity ! 

Heaven  needs  it  too ; 

Our  bosoms  yearn  and  pant 

Rather  indeed  our  God  to  justify 

Than  our  ownself      Oh,  why  then  drop  the  key 

That  tunes  discordant  worlds  to  harmony.''" 

IX.  The  Law  of  God.  The  Moral  Law  of  God  is 
embraced  in  a  few  words.  A  lawyer  asked  Jesus, 
"Which  is  the  greatest  commandment?"  This  was  the 
reply,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy 
heart,  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind.  This 
is  the  first  and  great  commandment,  and  the  second  is 
like  unto  it,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself. 
On  these  two  commandments  hang  all  the  law  and  the 
prophets."  Matt.  xxii.  36-40.  Love  to  God,  and  love 
to  man,  is  the  sum  of  the  law  —  the  whole  of  religion. 
This  was  never  repealed,  and  never  will  be.  It  is  eternal 
and  universal.  It  is  the  law  of  earth,  it  is  the  law  of 
heaven.  Men  and  angels,  here  and  hereafter,  now  and 
forever,  are  required   to  love  God   supremely,  and  all 


Universal  Salvation.  £^ 

beings  created  in  the  divine  image.  If  millions,  as  Mr. 
S.  asserts,  shall  be  banished  to  an  endless  hell,  they  will 
still  be  required  to  love  God,  and  their  neighbors  as  them- 
selves. This  w^ill  be  their  duty  v^^hen  they  enter  the  fiery 
gates  of  their  infernal  prison,  and  will  continue  to  be 
their  duty  forever  and  ever,  in  whatever  quarter  of  satan's 
dominions  they  may  be  established.  True,  it  is  rather 
difficult  to  understand  why  they  should  be  required  to 
love  the  monster  who  is  butchering  them  in  hell  eternally, 
but  then,  the  whole  system  is  full  of  difficulties.  It 
seems  to  me,  they  would  owe  him  nothing  but  intense 
hatred — hatred  for  cursing  them  with  birth,  with  lite, 
with  immortalit}'.  To  call  on  the  victims  of  almighty 
wrath  to  love  the  author  of  their  dreadful  doom,  would 
be  adding  insult  to  insult,  mockery  to  mockery,  diabol- 
ism to  diabolism.  But  this  terrible  creed  is  a  great  error, 
is  a  libel  on  Love — on  him  whose  name  is  Love.  Hp 
calls  on  all  to  love  him,  and  it  is  the  duty  of  all  to  love 
him,  because  he  is,  and  ever  will  be,  the  loving  friend 
and  father  of  all. 

This  love  will  be  fulfilled.  Said  Jesus,  "  Think  not 
that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  lav/  or  the  prophets ;  I  am 
not  come  to  destroy,  but  \.o  f^dfill.  For  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  till  heaven  and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  tittle  shall  in 
no  wise  pass  from  the  law  till  all  be  fulfilled^  Matt.  v. 
17,  18.  Here  Jesus  declares,  that  the  law  of  God  shall 
be  fulfilled  in  every  "jot"  and  "tittle."  It  is  easier  for 
heaven  and  earth  to  pass  away,  than  for  the  law  of  God 
to  fail  of  being  fulfilled.  The  ceremonial  portion  of  the 
law  was  external,  temporal,  and  local,  of  the  earth, 
earthy,  and  was  fulfilled  in  Christ's  earthly  life.  But  the 
Moral  Law — love  to  God,  and  love  to  man — is  internal, 
spiritual,  universal,  and   eternal,  and  was  not  fulfilled   in 


48  Oral  Disctission. 

the  earthly  life  of  Christ,  but  will  be  fulfilled  when  Jesus 
shall  return  the  kingdom  to  God,  and  God  be  all  in  all. 
"  Then  cometh  the  end,  when  Jesus  shall  have  delivered 
up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father,  *  *  *  * 
when  all  things  shall  be  sulDdued  unto  him,  *  *  * 
and  God  be  all  in  all."  i  Cor.  xv.  24-28.  The 
ceremonial  law  was  fulfilled  at  the  end  of  Christ's  earthly- 
life;  hence  he  then  said,  "It  is  finished."  The  Moral 
Law  will  be  fulfilled  at  the  end  of  his  reisfn.  Accordinsr 
to  the  gospel,  "  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."  Rom. 
xiii.  10.  "All  the  law  is  fulfilled  in  this  word.  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  Gal.  v.  14.  And  as 
at  the  end  God  will  be  all  in  all,  the  law  will  be  fulfilled 
— eveiy  "jot"  and  "tittle"  of  it.     \^Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  second  reply.] 

The  gentleman's  second  speech,  to  which  you  have 
given  such  commendable  attention,  being  almost  entirely 
devoted  to  the  work  of  reconstruction,  I  accept  as  a  hand- 
some compliinent  to  my  first  reply.  His  woi-k  of  recon- 
struction, however,  was  by  no  means  complete,  notwith- 
standing so  much  of  his  time  was  so  zealously  devoted 
to  it.  Indeed,  he  seemed  most  of  the  time  to  be  in  the 
negative,  defiantly  calling  upon  me  to  prove  this,  that, 
and  the  other  thing!  When  it  comes  my  turn  to 
affirm,  I  shall  then  try  to  prove  my  affirmative.  At 
present,  however,  I  am  in  the  negative.  Mr.  Manford 
is  in  the  affirmative.  But  he  seems  not  a  little  troubled 
about  "hell."  My  doctrine  of  an  "endless  hell,"  "hell 
torments,"  "  endless  burnings,"  seems  to  make  him  unac- 
countably nervous,  even  before  I  have  uttered  a  word  on 


Universal  Salvation.  49 

the  subject.  My  advice  to  him  is  to  be  quiet,  and  save 
his  thunder  for  the  proper  time.  We  vv^ill  attend  to  the 
"  hell "  question,  so  far  as  I  am  affirmant,  at  the  proper 
time.  He  need  not  be  tormented  by  that  question 
before  his  time. 

He  thinks  that  in  admitting  the  eternal  existence  of 
all  men,  I  differ  from  my  brethren,  for,  he  says,  "  hosts 
of  them  contend,  with  immense  zeal,  that  all  v\rho  leave 
this  world  sinful,  will  be  annihilated,  soul  and  body." 
If,  by  my  "  brethren,"  the  gentlemen  meant  what  I  sup- 
pose most  of  you  understood  him  to  mean,  I  have  simply 
to  say,  he  is  greatly  in  error.  Perhaps  I  know  almost  as 
much  about  the  views  of  my  brethren  as  my  opponent 
does.  I  think  I  know  he  has  misrepresented  them  in 
this  matter — unintentionally,  of  course.  Wc,  as  a  people, 
have  very  generally  "  contended  with  immense  zeal " 
against  the  very  error  he  charges  upon  us.  I  have  found, 
moreover,  that  those  who  do  contend  that  the  wicked  will 
be  annihilated,  and  my  friend  Manford,  use  the  same 
thunder.  They  and  he  must  be  "  brethren."  At  any 
rate  they  howl  alike.  Hence,  the  gentleman  thinks  the 
views  of  Annihilationists  "infinitely  better"  than  mine. 
Still,  he  thinks  "either  view  is  unspeakably  dishonorable 
to  God."  But  the  question  comes  up,  are  we  infaUiblv 
safe  in  accepting  just  what  he  says,  in  a  matter  of  this 
sort  ?  Who  called  and  sent  him  to  tell  us  just  what  is,  an d 
what  is  not,  " dishonorable  to  God"?  Anyhow,  might 
we  not,  without  losing  all  our  reverence,  call  upon  him 
for  some  sign  of  infallibility,  before  accepting  all  he  is 
pleased  to  say  upon  the  subject. 

God  did  once  even  make  a  "pile  of  ashes"  of  some 
wicked  people.  Was  that  "  a  monument  of  his  folly  and 
cruelty " .''     Mr.  Manford  believes  all  sinners  are  in  hell 

5 


50  Oral  Discussion. 

nozv.  Do  the  "  walls  "  of  the  hell  they  are  in  now  "  pro- 
claim to  the  astonished  universe  the  infinite  malignity  of 
their  builder"?  If  so,  will  he  tell  us  who  was  "  their 
builder  "  ?  Who  builds  the  "  walls  "  of  the  hell  he  believes 
in?  Will  he  say  the  sinner  does,  himself?  If  so,  will 
he  allow  me  to  agree  with  him  on  the  subject  of  "walls" 
and  their  builders?     We  shall  see. 

In  the  next  place,  the  gentleman  proceeded  to  say  a 
good  many  things — that  were  easier  for  him  to  talk 
about,  than  to  meet  the  issue  fairly — upon  the  assumption 
that  I  had  said,  or  the  presumption  that  I  would  say, 
that  "  none  will  enter  the  heavenly  kingdom,  but  those 
who  are  regenerated  in  this  world;"  while,  in  fact,  I 
have  said  no  such  thing,  and  do  not  mean  to.  I  do  not 
believe,  for  instance,  that  infants  are  regenerated  in  this 
world,  and  yet  I  believe  they  will  all  enter  the  eternal 
kingdom.  I  do  not  believe  they  need  any  moral  change 
to  fit  them  for  heaven.  I  thought  I  said  this  distinctly 
enough  before.  I  do  not  believe  Mr.  Campbell  ever 
taught  any  thing  that  involved  the  necessity  of  a  moral 
change  to  fit  infonts  for  heaven.  I  might  admit  that 
many  who  are  not  infants  will  enter  tlie  heavenly  king- 
dom without  being  regenerated  in  this  world,  and  come 
infinitely  short  of  admitting  the  truth  of  his  monstrous 
affirmation,  as  we  shall  see  as  we  proceed. 

The  gentleman  thinks  if  I  am  right,  "  nearly  all  the 
patriots  who  laid  down  their  lives  in  three  wars  to  save 
this  country,  are  now  blowing  the  flames  of  hell,"  as 
their  reward.  Well,  indeed,  he  must  have  quite  a 
degraded  opinion  of  the  patriots,  to  think  they  "  nearly 
all"  go  to  hell  when  they  die!  And,  by  the  way,  he 
has  given  us  a  clue  to  what  he  thinks  of  them,  while 
they  live  in  this  world.     Of  course,  only  such  would  go 


Universal  Salvation. 


51 


to  hell,  were  they  to  die,  as  are  in  hell  now,  if  Univer- 
salism  is  true.  So,  in  Mr.  Manford's  view,  "  nearly  all " 
living  patriots  are  in  hell  now !  And  where  are  those 
gone,  according  to  him,  who  left  this  world  sinful,? 
Will  he  tell  us  }  I  have  no  hope  that  he  will.  Perhaps 
they  are  " blowing  the  flames  of  hell"  to  purify  them- 
selves for  heaven — and  thus  being  reconciled  to  God ! 
But  why  this  reference  to  patriots?  Is  it  argument? 
Does  my  friend  think  it  is  ?  Is  this  question  to  be  settled 
by  such  references?  Is  it  a  question  to  be  settled  by  a 
majority  of  the  people,  that  one  need  throw  himself  out 
upon  a  course  of  electioneering  for  the  sympathies  of 
such  as  sympathize  with  the  patriot  dead  ?  Why  does  my 
friend  use,  with  so  much  e.'nphasis,  such  language  as 
"  endless  burnings,"  "  endless  hell  torments,"  "  blowing 
the  flames  of  hell "  ?  Have  I  used  such  language  ?  Do 
you  ever  hear  any  body  use  it,  but  Universalists  ?  What 
worthy  purpose  does  he  hope  to  serve  by  the  use  of  such 
language?  Does  he  believe  the  Bible?  I  must,  of 
course,  not  even  allow  myself  to  think  he  does  not. 
But  does  he  not  know  that  his  hearers,  even  skeptics, 
know  that  the  language  he  ridicules  with  so  much  seem- 
ing pleasure,  is  more  nearly  the  language  of  scripture 
than  mine?  He  can  only  complain  of  me,  that  I  apply 
the  scripture  language  expressive  of  the  punishment  of 
the  wicked  to  the  future  world,  and  make  it  eternal^ 
while  Universalists  generally  apply  it  all  to  this  world. 
Mr.  Manford,  however,  only  differs  with  me  as  to  the 
eternity  of  punishment.  Let  us  meet  the  question  like 
men,  sir,  and  not  be  found  ridiculing  what  is  so  nearly 
the  language  of  the  book  we  both  accept  as  from  God. 

I  admitted  that  such  persons  as  are  said  to  be  saved — 
Christians  —  have    nevertheless    some    "  imperfections " 


52  Oi-al  Discussion. 

while  they  live  in  this  world,  and  the  gentleman  thence 
concludes  that  they  are  therefore  "  not  entirely  reconciled 
to  God,"  and  will  hence  have  to  be  reconciled  and  saved 
in  the  future  world.  But  physical  and  constitutional 
imperfections,  such  as  saved  persons  still  have,  do  not 
imply  irreconciliation.  Christians  are,  by  the  Apostles, 
represented  as  being  both  reconciled  and  saved,  already, 
and  are,  as  such,  promised  that  they  shall  lose  the  weak- 
nesses and  imperfections  they  still  have  in  the  resurrection. 
N  ow,  will  the  gentleman  tell  us  what  he  means  by  sal- 
vation? What,  for  perspicuity,  does  he  understand  the 
Savior  to  mean  by  "  saved,"  when  he  said,  "  he  that 
believes  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved"  ?  Can  I  get  a 
direct  answer  to  this  question?  or  will  it  be  laid  over  till 
"  due  time,"  as  was  that  one  pertaining  to  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead  ?  A  sharp  definition  here,  will  clear 
away  a  good  deal  of  smoke.     Is  that  desirable  } 

The  gentleman  thinks  I  intimated  that  Universalists 
believe  "God  will  force  men  to  be  reconciled  and  saved," 
when  I  "must  know  that  is  a  misstatement."  Well,  it 
may  be  a  misstatement  of  Universalism,  but  I  certainly 
do  not  know  it  to  be  such.  Man,  as  I  understand 
Universalism  to  teach,  will  not  only  be  forced  into  recon- 
ciliation and  salvation,  but  he  is  now  forced  to  do  what- 
ever he  does,  and  to  be  whatever  he  is.  He  is  forced 
into  sin — or  into  what  is  called  sin,  by  the  unlearned — 
forced  to  live  in  sin ;  forced  into  hell — such  as  Universal- 
ists believe  in — then  forced  to  do  what  we  call  right, 
and  will  finally  be  forced  into  heaven.  Indeed,  this  is 
the  only  ground  on  which  Universalism  has  ever  made 
,any  show  of  defense.  It  has  been  and  it  must  be  held, 
that  man  cannot  in  any  case  violate  the  will,  the  jourpose, 
the  intention,  of  God ;  otherwise  there  is  not  the  shadow 


Universal  Salvation.  53 

of  an  argument  to  be  thence  derived  for  Universal  ism. 
But  let  us  see  if  I  am  misstating  the  matter.  I  suppose 
my  friend  will  accept  Hosea  Ballon  as  an  orthodox  Uni- 
versalist.  He  says,  [Treatise  on  the  Atonement,  page 
16):  "Now  to  reason  justly,  we  fmtst  conclude,  that  if 
God  possesses  infinite  wisdom,  he  could  never  intend 
anything  to  take  place,  or  be,  that  will  not  take  place, 
or  be;  nor  that  which  is,  or  will  be,  not  to  be,  at  the 
time  when  it  is."  Again,  page  17,  he  says,  "The 
above  arguments  are  introduced  to  show  the  absurdity 
of  admitting  a  violation  of  the  intention  of  the  Supreme 
Legislator.  I  now  turn  on  the  other  side,  and  admit  as  a 
fact,  ivhat  I  have  siifficie?itly  refuted,  viz.,  that  the  in- 
tentions  of  God,  as  a  supreme  legislator,  are  violated  by 
the  sin  of  finite  beings."  Again  I  read,  on  page  36 : 
"  But  perhaps  the  objector  will  say,  this  denies  the  lib- 
erty of  the  will,  and  makes  God  the  author  of  sin.  To 
which  I  reply,  desking  the  reader  to  recollect  what  I 
have  said  of  sin  in  showing  its  nature ;  by  which  it  is 
discovered,  that  God  may  be  the  innocent  and  holy  cause 
of  that  which  in  a  limited  sense  is  sin,  but  as  respects 
the  meaning  of  God,  it  is  intended  for  good."  *  *  *  * 
"  If  it  should  be  granted  that  sin  will  finally  terminate 
for  good,  in  the  moral  system,  it  will  then  be  necessary 
to  admit  that  God  is  its  first  cause,  or  we  cannot  say 
that  God  is  the  atUhor  of  all  good"  That's  logic  for 
you  !  But  to  make  good  more  than  I  "  intimated,"  I 
read  once  inore,  page  23 :  "  Perhaps  the  reader  by  this 
time  is  ready  to  say,  according  to  this  reasoning,  there 
can  be  no  such  tiling  as  real  evil  in  the  Universe.  If, 
by  real  evil,  be  meant  something  that  ought  not  to  be, 
in  respect  to  all  the  consequences  that  attend  it,  /  cannot 
admit  of  its  existence." 


54  Oral  Discussion. 

If  these  readings  do  not  make  good  all  I  intimated  as 
to  "  force,"  according  to  Universalism,  my  friend  has 
only  to  intimate  that  he  is  not  quite  satisfied,  and  I  will 
help  him  to  more. 

Now  the  trouble  with  Mr.  Manford  is,  that  he  tries  to 
argue  universal  salvation  from  the  will,  purpose,  desire 
and  intention  of  God,  without  maintaining  the  utter 
inviolability  of  the  will,  purpose,  desire  and  intention  of 
God.  This,  I  submit,  cannot  be  done.  There  is  not  a 
man  living  that  can  make  an  argument  of  it.  I  think  I 
know  logic  when  I  see  it,  and  I  fearlessly  pronounce  my 
friend's  argument,  as  he  calls  it,  a  huge  burlesque  on 
logic.  He  does  not  believe  "  God  will  save  a  sinner 
any  how  r  Indeed  !  Then  how  does  he  know  that  all 
will  be  saved  }  Unless  the  sinner  is  to  be  saved  anyhoiv 
there  is  no  certainty  that  he  will  ever  be  saved  at  all. 
The  gentleman  thinks  the  sinner  is  to  be  saved  on  the 
condition  of  his  reconciliation^  and  yet  God  will  not 
force  him  to  be  reconciled.  Well,  that's  about  what  I 
believe ;  and  how  comes  it  to  pass  that  he  is  a  Universal- 
ist  and  I  am  not  ?  Can  he  tell  "i  I  think  I  can.  It  is 
because  he  jumps  to  the  conclusion  without  premises, 
and  I  do  not.  And  on  this  question  of  logic,  I  have  the 
strongest  minds  among  his  brethren  on  my  side.  I  call 
in  Father  Ballou  again,  whose  very  garments  are  redolent 
of  logic.  On  the  hypothesis  that  salvation  is  conditional 
— which  my  friend  admits — he  says,  "  Is  it  certain^ 
according  to  this  plan,  that  any  of  Adam's  postei-ity  will 
obtain  salvation  ?  Is  it  not  in  the  power  of  all  men  to 
7ieglect  those  conditions?  If  it  be  not,  it  destroys  the 
nature  of  conditions." — Treatise  on  the  Atonement^ 
page  97.  Ballou  is  logical.  There  is  nothing  more  ob- 
viously true  than  that  that  which  is  conditional  may  or 


Universal  Salvation.  55 

may  not  obtain.  To  say  a  thing  is  conditional  that  must 
absolutely  be,  is  to  destroy  the  very  nature  of  conditions. 
So  it  turns  out  that  I  have  not,  even  by  intimation,  mis- 
stated Univcrsalism.  The  trouble  with  m<  friend  is,  that 
he  has  switched  off  the  track!  And  I  venture  to  predict 
he  will  run  into  deeper  troubles  than  those  he  has 
run  off  the  track  to  avoid.  To  prove  that  all  men  will 
finally  be  saved,  without  a  doubt,  he  must  deny  that  it 
is  conditional.  He  inust  hold,  in  effect,  that  sinners 
will  not  only  be  forced  into  heaven,  but  forced  to  stay 
there  eternally !  And  judging  from  their  manifest  tastes 
and  habits,  nothing  but  force  would  keep  some  there, 
if  there  were  any  less  holy  place  to  be  found  in  God's 
universe. 

Now,  I  think  I  fully  understand  what  my  friend  calls 
the  "argument  froin  the  will,  pleasure  and  desire  of 
God."  He  does  not  affirm,  as  Uuiversalists  have  gene- 
rally done  heretofore,  that  "  God's  will,  pleasure  and 
desire  are  done  at  all  times  and  in  all  places  in  this 
world"  He  only  contends,  that  as  all  now  have  the 
opportunity  to  be  reconciled  to  God  and  saved,  and  as 
God  is  unchangeable,  "  all  eternally  will  have  at  least 
the  opportunity  given  them  to  grow  wiser  and  better." 
Suppose  I  admit  what  my  friend  cannot  prove  at  this 
point,  though  it  is  indispensable  to  his  argument,  namely, 
that  sinners  will  eternally  have  the  opportunity  to  be 
reconciled  to  God  and  saved,  does  the  truth  of  his  prop- 
osition follow  ?  By  no  means.  How  will  he  go  about 
proving  that  such  persons  as  slight,  with  all  possible 
contempt,  every  opportunity  of  salvation  in  this  life, 
will  certainly  accept  and  improve  such  opportunity  in 
the  future  life.?  He  is  a  reasoner,  a  man  of  learning  and 
large  experience,  and  of  course,  if  any  one  can  prove 


56  Oral  Discussion. 

such  a  proposition,  he  is  the  very  man  for  the  task.  I 
confess  I  am  ahnost  nervously  anxious  to  see  how  he 
will  go  about  the  work.  We  cannot  put  up  with  guess 
work  at  this  point.  We  must  have  proof,  or  his  cause 
fiiils.     This  is  plain  to  all. 

But  then  I  do  not  believe  that  any  man  will  have  eter- 
nity in  which  to  slight  the  goodness  and  love  of  God. 
I  do  not  believe  any  man  will  have  eternity  in  which  to 
contemptibly  disregard  all  heaven's  invitations  to  virtue, 
salvation  and  life.  That  he  should,  is  neither  reasonable 
nor  scriptural.  Nor  do  I  believe  any  one's  opportunities 
will  ever  be  cut  off  on  account  of  any  change  in  God, 
or  Chi'ist,  or  love,  or  goodness,  or  mercy,  or  virtue,  or 
heaven,  either.  Will  men  who,  for  example,  "were 
once  enlightened,  and  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift, 
and  were  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  have 
tasted  the  good  word  of  God,  and  the  powers  of  the 
world  to  come,"  but,  having  fallen  away,  "  have  crucified 
the  Lord  afresh,  and  put  him  to  an  open  shame," — have 
"  counted  his  blood  an  unholy  thing,  and  done  despite 
to  the  spirit  of  grace," — will  such  persons  have  eternity 
in  which  to  reject  oflcred  mercy  and  salvation  ?  Is  it 
reasonable  tliat  they  should.'*  vShall  it  be  proclaimed 
throughout  the  whole  realm  of  intelligent  being,  that 
God,  the  governor  of  this  universe,  will  allow  one  of  his 
creatures  to  rebel  against  him,  and  despise  his  love  and 
offered  mercy  to  all  eternity.''  Reason  stands  pale  before 
such  a  proposition.  Neither  is  it  scriptural,  as  I  think 
we  shall  see.  But  before  noticing  other  scriptures  upon 
this  point,  I  shall  give  respectful  attention  to  what  the 
gentleman  had  to  say  of  one  I  incidentally  noticed  in 
my  former  speech :  "  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy 
stiil."     He  thinks  this  sentence  has   been  already  pro- 


Universal  Salvation.  ^y 

nounced.  Will  he  please  tell  us  zv/ieu  God  said,  "  He 
that  is  filthy,  let  Jmn  be  filthy  still  ? "  I  am  quite  certain 
it  would  be  a  bit  of  information  to  me,  and  I  dare  say 
it  would  afibrd  some  consolation  to  such  as  love  filthiness, 
for  the  gentleman  to  show,  that  God  has  already  said, 
"  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still" !  If  Mr.  Man- 
ford  believes  this  decree  has  already  gone  forth^  of 
course,  he  now  says  to  sinners,  "  Be  filthy  still."  I  never 
heard  him  make  this  proclamation,  but  if  God  has  made 
it,  as  he  thinks,  of  course  it  is  wrong  for  men  to  ask  the 
filthy  to  turn  away  from  filthiness.  But  we  are  told 
that  the  context  says,  "  the  time  is  at  hand,"  "•  behold,  I 
come  quickly,"  and  so  forth.  "At  hand,"  in  scripture 
style,  however,  does  not  necessarily  mean  in  a  few  days, 
or  even  years.  And  the  word  T'aku^  rendered  quickly 
in  the  text,  may  mean  no  more  than  rapidly,  or  suddenly ; 
and  so  the  Lord  will  come;  and  the7z  it  will  be  said, 
*'  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still." 

The  gentleman's  attention  is  now  invited  to  the  follow- 
ing: "Then  said  Jesus  unto  them,  I  go  my  way,  and  ye 
shall  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in  your  sins;  whither  I  go  ye 
cannot  come.  Then  said  the  Jews,  will  he  kill  himself  } 
because  he  saith,  whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come.  And 
he  said  unto  them.  Ye  are  from  beneath;  I  am  from 
above;  ye  are  of  this  world;  I  am  not  of  this  world. 
I  said  therefore  unto  you,  that  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins; 
for  if  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  In  your 
sins."  John  viii.  21-34.  This  is  the  language  of  Jesus, 
addressed  to  persons  who  were  determined  not  to  believe 
in  him.  He  knew  their  determination,  and  by  this  lan- 
guage taught  them  three  things,  i.  That  the  time  would 
come  when  they  would  "seek"  him  in  vain.  2.  That 
they  should  die  in  their  sins — or,  in  the  language  of  our 


58  Oral  Discicssion. 

proposition,  "should  leave  this  world  sinful"  —  and,  3. 
"Whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come."  Now,  it  strikes  me, 
that  before  this  scripture  and  the  gentleman's  proposi- 
tion can  be  made  to  harmonize,  one,  or  the  other,  or 
both,  will  have  to  be  considerably  tinkered.  The  propo- 
sition asserts,  that  "  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will 
finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved,"  while  the  pas- 
sage of  scripture  seems  to  me  to  teach,  at  least,  that  those 
who  live  and  die  willfully  and  determinedly  sinful,  can 
never  go  where  Christ  is.  Can  both  be  true.''  If  so,  the 
gentleman,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  will  be  able  to  show  us 
how  they  can. 

Attention  is  also  invited  to  another  scripture,  which  I 
think  imports  the  same:  "Strive  to  enter  in  at  the 
strait  gate;  for  many,  I  say  unto  you,  will  seek  to  enter 
in,  and  shall  not  be  able.  When  once  the  Master  of  the 
house  is  risen  up,  and  hath  shut  to  the  door,  and  ye  begin 
to  stand  without,  and  to  knock  at  the  door,  saying.  Lord, 
Lord,  open  unto  us;  and  he  shall  answer  and  say  unto 
you,  I  know  you  not,  whence  ye  ai"c :  then  shall  yc  begin 
to  say,  we  have  eaten  and  drunk  in  thy  presence,  and 
thou  hast  taught  in  our  streets.  But  he  shall  say,  I  tell 
you,  I  know  you  not,  whence  ye  are ;  depart  from  me, 
all  ye  workers  of  iniquity.  There  shall  be  weeping  and 
gnashing  of  teeth,  when  ye  shall  see  Abraham,  and  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  and  all  the  prophets,  in  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  you  yourselves  thrust  out.  And  they  shall  come 
from  the  east,  and  from  the  west,  and  from  the  north, 
and  from  the  south,  and  shall  sit  down  in  the  kingdom 
of  God."     Luke  xiii.  23-29. 

Here,  the  Lord  teaches  that  such  persons  as  refuse  "  to 
enter  in  at  the  strait  gate"  now,  hereafter  '-'-will  seek 
to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  he  able"  and  this  will  be, 


Universal  Salvation.  59 

"  ivhen  once  the  Master  of  the  house  hath  risen  up,  and 
hath  shut  to  the  door."  Now,  as  to  what  is  meant  by  the 
"  door,"  here,  my  friend  may  say  himself.  Is  it  the  door 
of  the  cl:iurch  here,  or  of  the  heavenly  kingdom  ?  In 
either  case,  has  the  Master  of  the  house  ever  yet  risen  up, 
and  shut  it?  Have  men  ever  sought  to  enter  into  the 
church,  and  were  not  able,  because  the  Lord  had  closed 
the  door?  I  think  not.  I  think  the  Lord  "hath  set  an 
open  door,"  and  says  to  all,  Come.  But  the  time  will 
come  when  some  "will  seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be 
able,"  and  will  not  be  able  because  the  Lord  will  have 
"  shut  to  the  door."  And  this  shall  be  xuhen  the  persons 
whom  the  Savior  addressed  "  shall  SEE  Abraham,  and 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  all  the  prophets  in  the  kingdom," 
and  themselves  thrust  away — "johen  the  righteous  "  shall 
come  from  the  east,  and  from  the  west,  and  from  the  north, 
and  from  the  south,  and  shall  sit  down  in  the  kingdom 
of  God." 

We  are  told  that  "  God's  mercy  and  saving  Grace  are 
not  restricted  to  any  age,  or  world,  or  place."  This,  of 
course,  means  that  if  sinners  do  not  choose  to  obey  the 
Gospel  in  this  world,  they  can  do  so  in  the  world  to  come. 
If  they  choose  not  to  obey  in  this  "  age,"  they  will  have 
time  and  opportunity  to  do  so,  in  any  of  the  millions  of 
ages  to  come,  and  they  need  not  be  in  any  particular 
trouble  about  the  matter  either,  as  they  certainly  will 
"  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved."  Then  the 
gentleman  gravely  turns  about  and  calls  on  me  to  prove 
some  negative!  He  is  in  the  afiirmative,  and  aflirms 
quite  enough  to  keep  him  busy  proving  during  this 
life,  and  a  good  part  of  the  life  to  come.  Let  him^ 
therefore,  bring  on  his  proof,  and  not  call  on  me  to  prove 
anything  till  my  time  comes. 


6o  Oral  Discussion. 

Next,  he  says,  "  all  mankind  are  the  children  of  God," 
and  that  "Jesus  tells  sinners  to  pray,  '  Our  Father  who 
art  in  heaven.' "  And  a  good  many  other  things  he  said 
in  that  connection  which  I  think  well  calculated  to  injure 
the  cause  he  advocates,  in  the  estimation  of  all  who 
believe  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God.  What  did  the 
Savior  mean,  I  wonder,  when  he  said  to  sinners,  "  Ye  are 
of  your  father  the  dezdV  ?  And  were  they  sinners 
whom  Jesus  taught  to  pray,  "  Our  Father  who  art  in 
heaven,"  or  were  they  his  disciples  ?  I  might  return  my 
friend  his  own  advice,  every  whit  whole — "  O  my  friend, 
sit  at  the  feet  of  Jesus,  and  learn  better." 

I  admitted  that  when  God's  purpose  depends  alone 
upon  himself  for  its  performance,  it  will  certainly  be 
performed.  The  gentleman  says,  God  has  so  purposed 
the  reconciliation  and  salvation  of  men.  Indeed !  Then 
why  did  he  just  before  object  to  my  intimating  that  he 
believes  God  will  force  men  to  reconciliation  ?  He  under- 
took to  prove  this  doctrine  oi  force  by  Paul;  but  his 
failure  was  too  apparent  to  require  much  attention.  There 
is  some  diflerence  between  God  having  "purposed  in 
himself"  the  reconciliation  and  salvation  of  all  men,  and 
his  having  purposed  to  accomplish  the  thing  himself, 
without  respect  to  the  will  or  agency  of  7na7i.  The  former 
is  the  most  that  can  be  claimed  Paul  taught  in  the  quota- 
tion in  question;  the  latter  is  the  doctrine  of  Ballou, 
and  the  Universalist  fathers. 

VIII.  "God  is  the  Governor  of  mankind,"  is  my 
friend's  eighth  argument. 

What  a  wonderful  facility  some  men  have  for  counting 
out  arguments!  Here  is  an  argument  with  one  premise! 
And,  in  this  respect,  it  is  very  like  the  other  seven.  And 
what  does  the  one  premise  mean }     I  pronounce  it  an 


Universal  Salvation.  6i 

equivocal  statement.  "God  is  the  Governor  of  man- 
kind." What  does  my  friend  mean  by  that  ?  Does  he 
mean  that  God  actually  governs  all  men  ?  If  so,  I 
squarely  deny  it.  Does  he  simply  mean  that  all  men 
ought  to  submit  to  the  Government  of  God.?  If  so, 
what  of  it,  as  respects  his  proposition.?  Just  nothing. 
True,  God  rules  for  the  good  of  the  ruled ;  but  w^ho  are 
the  ruled  }  All  men  }  Christ  now  rules  all  who  will  be 
ruled  by  him — rules  them  for  their  good ;  chastises  them 
for  their  good ;  and  makes  all  things  work  for  their  good. 
But  some  will  not  have  him  to  rule  them.  Such  per- 
sons he  does  not  rule,  because  they  will  not  be  ruled  by 
him.  Nevertheless,  "he  must  reign  till  he  hath  PUT 
ALL  ENEMIES  UNDER  HIS  FEET."  Is  that 
the  reconciliation  and  salvation  the  gentleman  contends 
for.? 

IX.  "The  law  of  God,"  is  the  gentleman's  ninth 
argument ! 

"  Love  to  God  and  love  to  man  is,"  we  are  told,  "  the 
sum  of  the  law — the  whole  of  religion."  Love  for  God 
and  mankind  does,  I  grant,  involve  the  whole  duty  of 
man;  but  God  does  not  compel  obedience  to  this  law; 
and  as  some  will  not  voluntarily  yield  obedience  to  it,  it 
is  hence  not  obeyed  by.  all.  Now,  I  submit  that,  God 
must  either  change  and  compel  obedience,  or  man  must 
change  and  volunteer  obedience,  or  remain  eternally 
disobedient,  and  hence  eternally  unsaved.  My  friend 
admits  that  God  will  never  compel  obedience.  He  also 
admits  that  men  can  never  be  saved  without  obedience. 
Then  his  conclusion  depends  upon  two  guesses:  First, 
That  men  will  always  have  the  opportunity  to  repent; 
and  secondly,  That  every  man  will  certainly  improve  that 
opportunity.     In  both  these  guesses  we  have  seen  that 


62  Oral  Discussion, 

both  scripture  and  reason  are  against  him.     Thus  stands 
argument  number  nine ! 

But  the  gentleman  says,  "  This  law  will  be  fulfilled." 
I  suppose  he  means  that  every  human  being  will  accede 
to  and  obey  this  law.  But  the  question  arises,  how  does 
he  know  that  .''  Neither  God,  nor  Christ,  nor  any 
inspired  man,  has  ever  said  so.  Nor  have  I  ever  been 
able  to  discover  anything  from  which  I  can  infer  that  it 
will  ever  be  so.  Here,  therefore,  is  where  we  are  in  need 
of  proof — not  inferences  or  guesses — but  proof — good  and 
sufficient  proof.  And  here  the  gentleman  instead  of 
bi-ead  gives  us  a  stone.  What  is  his  proof  at  this  point.'' 
It  is  this :  "  Said  Jesus,  '  Think  not  that  I  have  come 
to  destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets,  I  have  not  come  to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfill.  For  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  Till 
heaven  and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  tittle  shall  in  no  wise 
pass  from  the  law  till  all  be  fulfilled.' "  And  does  this 
prove  that  every  human  being  will  obey  the  law  that 
requires  love  to  God  and  to  man?  Christ  did  fulfill  the 
law  and  the  prophets;  but  the  obedience  God  requires  of 
man — each  man  for  himself — is  certainly  another  thing. 
It  was  difficult  for  me  to  think  the  gentleman  serious 
when  he  quoted  this  scripture  to  prove  what  needed  to 
be  proved.  It  required  me  to  let  down  my  appreciation 
of  his  scriptural  intelligence.  Docs  he  really  believe 
that  Christ  so  fulfilled  the  requirements  of  the  moral  law 
that  all  men  will  certainly  be  saved  whether  they  become 
obedient  or  not }  O,  no !  But  he  thinks  all  men  will 
yield  to  its  demands  of  them,  and  be  saved.  Here  he  is 
guessing  again.  The  scripture  does  not  say,  Christ  must 
reign  till  all  yield  obedience,  and  then  deliver  up  the 
kingdom  to  God,  vs^ho  shall  be  all  in  all.  "■  He  must 
reign   till   he  hath   put  all    enemies  under  his   feet" 


Universal  Salvation.  6^ 

Then  he  will  deliver  up  the  kingdotn  to  God,  who  will 
be  all  in  all  in  the  kingdom. 

Then  it  will  be  too  late  for  the  enemies  of  the  cross  of 
Christ  to  be  saved,  even  if  they  would.  Then  the  Spirit 
and  the  bride  will  cease  to  say,  "Come."  Then  the 
ten-ible  sentence  will  be  pronounced — '•  He  that  is  filthy, 
let  him  be  filthy  still."  Then  some  who  have  despised 
the  love  and  mercy  of  God,  who  would  not  love  right- 
eousness, and  virtue,  and  salvation,  and  life,  and  heaven, 
for  their  own  sakes,  in  their  terribley>'/V^/  "will  seek  to 
enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able,"  because  it  takes  more 
than  fright  to  fit  a  man  for  heaven.  Then  those  who 
have  spurned,  and  scoficd,  and  sneered,  and  jeered,  and 
scowled  at  the  Savior,  may  take  up  the  doleful  lamenta- 
tion, "  The  summer  is  past,  the  harvest  is  ended,  and  I 
am  not  saved,"  and  so  sink  forever  down  under  the  reflex 
influence  of  their  now  irremediable  depravity.  Does  any 
one  say,  "  the  thought  is  terrible  "  }  Well,  it  is  terrible. 
But  he  is  your  friend  that  tells  you  of  it  now,  and  admon- 
ishes you  to  turn  to  the  Savior  and  live.     [  Time  expired. 


[mr.  manford's  third  speech.] 

It  seems  that  Mr.  Sweeney  does  not  like  to  hear  me 
talk  about  the  fires  of  hell.  Circumstances  appear  to 
vary  the  temperature  of  the  infernal  regions.  When  a 
revival  is  wanted,  hell  is  a  very  hot  place,  and  all  soils 
of  devils  abound  therein.  But  in  a  discussion  like  the 
present,  it  is  quite  a  comfortable  kind  of  a  home  —  no 
devils  belching  fire,  no  imps  pouring  boiling  lead  down 
the  throats  of  the  damned,  no  serpents  hissing;  none 
biting,  choking   and  devouring  millions,  made   in  the 


64  Oral  Discussion. 

image  of  God.  This  unwillingness  to -defend  iiell  as  it  is 
preached,  on  revival  occasions,  is  an  excellent  omen.  It 
shows  that  its  advocates  dare  not  attempt  to  meet  the 
argument  against  so  terrible  a  doom. 

Notwithstanding  his  denial,  I  am  well  satisfied  that 
many  in  his  church  are  annihilationists.  One  minister, 
Mr.  Russell,  then  of  Indiana,  advocated  the  utter 
destruction  of  the  wicked  in  two  debates  I  had  with  him. 
He  was  in  good  standing  in  Mr.  S.'s  denomination. 
That  subject  has  divided,  and  is  still  dividing,  its 
churches.  I  read  three  or  four  journals  published  by  his 
sect,  and  that  doctrine  has  advocates  in  their  columns. 
It  is  creditable. to  his  people  that  they  are  giving  up  so 
dreadful  a  dogma  as  endless  woe.  Even  Mr.  Sweeney 
attempts  to  justify  the  destruction  theoiy  by  saying,  that  if 
God  will  make  an  ash  pile  of  a  portion  of  his  creation,  he 
will  do  no  more  than  he  has  done  in  this  world.  I  sup- 
pose he  refers  to  the  burning  of  Sodom.  Did  my  friend 
ever  read  the  following  passage,  "  And  they"— the  Sodo- 
mites—"were  haughty,  and  committed  abominations 
before  me :  therefore  I  took  them  away  as  I  saw  good." 
Eze.  xvi.  50.  Mark,  God  took  them  from  this  world 
as  he  saw  good  —  did  not  burn  them  up,  soul  as  well 
as  body.  Their  bodies  were  destroyed,  but  their  souls 
he  took  away  to  himself  as  he  saw  good.  No  inti- 
mation that  they  were  cast  into  a  furnace  of  fire  seven 
times  hotter  than  that  which  consumed  Sodom. 

I  have  no  doubt  we  make  our  own  hells.  But  there 
is  this  difference  between  Mr.  S.  and  myself —  I  cannot 
think  that  God  will  compel  any  to  suffer  the  pains 
of  hell  eternally.  There  is  redemption  from  them. 
David  was  delivered  from  the  lowest  hell.  Its  woes  are 
for  the  good  of  the  offender,  and   hence  reconcileable 


Universal  Salvation.  65 

with  the  goodness  of  God.  But  my  friend  strongly  con- 
tends, that  if  we  pass  into  the  spirit-land  unreconciled  to 
God,  our  doom  is  fixed  for  eternity ;  and  that  doom  is 
endless  sinning,  suffering,  and  dying.  You  might  as 
well  attempt  to  reconcile  God  to  satan,  as  to  reconcile 
this  dogma  with  the  goodness  of  God. 

It  is  quite  evident  from  my  friend's  evasions  again  and 
again,  that  he  and  his  church  agree  with  Mr.  Campbell, 
that  we  all  come  into  this  world  sinful^  and  that  all  who 
die  in  childhood  die  sinful.  True,  this  last  statement  is 
not  made  in  so  many  words.  But  they  do  say,  "  infants 
are  born  sinful,"  and  that  they  cannot  be  regenerated  in 
this  world;  they  then  must  Hie  sinful.  Now,  if  they  are 
not  regenerated  in  the  other  world  they  must  be  sinful 
forever.  Will  he  answer  this  question,  yes,  or  no, — do 
you  believe  that  any  of  mankind  are  born  sinful  ? 

While  I  do  not  suppose,  that  all  who  have  been  slain 
on  the  battle  fields  of  this  land  were  saints,  I  cannot 
think  any  of  them  deserved  being  chained  in  the  dark 
caverns  of  hell  forever,  or  that  the  good  God  will  so  chain 
them.  But  Mr.  Sweeney's  creed  says  that  many  of  them 
richly  DESERVE  all  that,  and  that  God  already  has,  or  soon 
will  so  dispose  of  them.  If  they  had  been  traitors,  and 
staid  at  home,  they  might  have  died  peaceably  in  their  beds, 
and  gone  to  heaven.  But  to  prevent  my  exposin'g  this 
horrid  deformity  of  his  foith,  he  cries  that  I  am  "  elec- 
tioneei"ing."  That  cry  will  not  deter  me  from  doing  my 
duty.  A  dogma  that  thus  damns  the  Saviors  of  our 
countiy  ought  to  die  a  death  that  knows  no  resurrection. 

"Reconciliation"  and  "salvation"  are   relative  terms, 

like  "good,"  and  many  other  words.    Jesus  said,  "Why 

callest  thou  me  good .''     There  is  none  good  but  one,  that 

is  God."     Christ  was  good  relatively  but  not  absolutely. 

6 


66  Oral  Discussio7i. 

So  Christians  are  good,  are  reconciled,  are  saved,  rela- 
lively^  but  not  absolutely.  There  is  room  to  advance  in 
those  Christian  graces.  Some  are  partially  good,  recon- 
ciled, saved,  now,  but  none  entirely.  And  if  there  is 
no  growth  after  death,  the  best  of  us  will  never  be 
perfectly  saved,  or  reconciled  to  God.  As  a  "  sharp 
definition"  of  salvation  is  much  wanted,  I  will  gratify 
my  friend.  Salvation  Is  deliverance  from  the  imperfec- 
tions of  earth.     Is  that  "sharp"  enough? 

If  Mr.  S.  does  not  garble  Mr.  Ballou,  and  the  latter 
means  what  my  friend  affirms,  I  do  not  subscribe  to  all 
he  says.  I  have  not  time  now  to  see  whether  he  misrepre- 
sents Mr.  Ballou  or  not.  I  believe  that  man  is  free,  and 
that  God  is  a  Sovereign.  Both  propositions  ai'e  correct. 
We  may  not  be  able  now  to  reconcile  them  with  each  other, 
for  our  knowledge  is  very  limited.  The  light  of  eternity 
is  required  to  make  all  clear  here.  And  this  view  of 
God  and  man  is  that  accepted  by  our  deno}7iination. 
We  contend,  that  God  saves  the  sinner  only  through 
THE  sinner's  will.  But  there  is  a  God,  and  he  reigns, 
and  will  execute  his  purposes.  And  as  he  purposes  "  to 
gather  together  all  things  In  Christ,"  it  will  be  done. 
The  Ishmaelltes  who  bought  Joseph,  and  the  brothers  who 
sold  him,  mere  free.  Yet  God  ruled  them — had  a  pur- 
pose, and  that  purpose  came  to  pass.  Judas  was  free 
when  he  did  what  "  must  needs  "  come  to  pass.  Luther, 
Washington,  Lincoln,  were  free.  But  God  had  work 
for  them  to  do,  had  a  purpose,  which  they  were 
instrumental  in  executing.  He  was  not  a  mere  spectator 
of  the  stirring  events  of  their  times.  God  has  a  purpose 
running  through  the  current  of  all  ages,  and  alL  eternity, 
and  what  he  purposes  will  as  surely  be  effected  as  God 
reigns,  and  rules.     Yet  man  is  free  now  and  forever. 


Universal  Salvation.  67 

But  my  worthy  friend  seems  to  think,  that  because  man 
is  free,  God  can  have  no  purpose  in  regard  to  him  which 
ensui'es  a  certainty.  From  this  we  dissent  with  heart 
and  understanding.  The  Bible  is  against  it.  The  Gos- 
pel is  against  it.  History  is  against  it.  Providence  is 
against  it.  God  is  against  it;  for  its  truth  admitted,  God 
ceases  to  be  God. 

In  defending  divine  revelation,  this  is  the  course  gener- 
ally pursued, — ist.  Show  that  revelation  is  probable; 
2nd.  That  it  certainly  has  been  made.  So,  I,  in  defend- 
ing the  truth  of  the  proposition  before  us,  ist.  Show 
that  Universal  Salvation  is  probable  and  possible;  2nd. 
That  it  is  certain.  I  show  that  it  is  possible  and  probable 
because  it  is  the  Everlasting  Will,  Everlasting 
Pleasure,  Everlasting  Desire,  of  Almighty  God, 
that  all  shall  be  saved ;  because  God's  love  for  all  is  an 
Everlasting  Love,  his  mercy  Everlasting  Mercy, 
his  government  an  Everlasting  Government,  his 
ownership  of  man  an  Everlasting  Ownership,  his 
image  in  man  an  Everlasting  Image,  his  command 
to  be  loyal  to  him  an  Everlasting  Command  ;  because 
God  is  the  Everlasting  Father  of  man.  I  then 
show  that  all  will  finally  be  certainly  saved,  because  he 
Purposes  to  save  them,  and  has  Promised  to  save 
them.  The  promises  are  yet  to  be  noticed.  Mr.  .Sweeney, 
on  the  other  hand,  contends  that  it  is  possible  for  all  now 
on  earth  to  be  saved,  but  one  tno7fiejzt  hence  it  may  be 
utterly  impossible  for  one  of  them  to  be  saved.  He 
seems  to  think,  God  has  no  purpose  concerning  man, 
that^man  cannot  defeat.  He  even  goes  so  far  as  to  deny 
that  God  governs  all.  He  preaches  Persian  philosophy, 
not  the  Gospel ;  he  follows  Zoroaster,  not  Christ,  in  this 
matter.     That  eastern  sage  taug:ht  there  were  two  Gods 


68  Oral  Discussion. 

— the  God  of  heaven  and  the  God  of  hell.  The  latter, 
the  author  of  all  evil ;  the  forraei",  the  author  of  all  good. 
He  also  taught,  that  the  good  God  ruled  the  good  of  our 
race,  and  the  evil  God — the  God  of  hell — ruled  the 
wricked.     And  that  seems  to  be  my  friend's  theology. 

What  a  spite  my  friend  has  for  poor  "  sinners."  He 
never  lets  a  chance  slip  without  giving  them  a  kick. 
Did  he  ever  read  the  following — "Two  men  went  into 
the  temple  to  pray ;  the  one  a  Pharisee,  and  the  other  a 
publican.  The  Pharisee  stood  and  prayed  thus :  '  God, 
I  thank  thee,  that  I  am  not  as  other  men,  *  *  as  this 
publican.'  *  *  *  And  the  publican,  standing  afar 
off,  would  not  lift  up  so  much  as  his  eyes  unto  heaven, 
but  smote  upon  his  breast,  saying,  '  God  be  merciful  to 
me  a  sinner.'"  Luke  xviii.  10-14.  1  do  hope  Mr.  S. 
will  learn  a  lesson  from  those  simple  words.  It  was  the 
self-styled  saints  that  Jesus  denounced;  he  always  had  a 
kind  word  for  sinners.  May  we  all  imitate  him  in  this 
respect. 

The  following  words  of  his  astonish  me,  "  Shall  it  be 
proclaimed  throughout  the  whole  realm  of  intelligent 
beings,  that  God,  the  Governor  of  this  universe,  will 
allow  one  of  his  creatures  to  rebel  against  him,  and 
despise  his  love  and  offered  mercy  to  all  eternity?" 
He  adds,  "  Reason  would  stand  pale  before  such  a  pro- 
position." I  think  so  too.  But  his  "proposition"  is 
infinitely  worse  than  that.  Instead  of  "o«e  "being  in 
that  condition  forever,  according  to  his  creed,  nearly  all 
mankind  will  be.  And  instead  of  it  being  " allowed" 
most  of  our  race  will  be  compelled  to  "rebel  against 
him"  "to  all  eternity."  That  is  exactly  what  he  is 
advocating  with  so  much  zeal.  I  am  glad  to  see  him  so 
horrified  at  his  own  "proposition."      I  entertain  strong 


Universal  Salvation.  69 

hopes  he  will  come  out  of  this  discussion  a  minister  "  of 
the  grace  of  God  whicli  bringeth  salvation  to  all  men." 
"  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still."  This  pas- 
sage was  noticed  in  my  last  speech.  I  showed  that  for 
it  to  teach  that  millions  of  mankind  fiiust  be  filthy  eter- 
nally it  should  read,  "  He  that  is  filthy  shall  be  filthy 
ETERNALLY,"  which  he  did  not  notice.  I  also  showed, 
that  the  passage  when  written  was  to  be  fulfilled 
'''•quickly"  that  the  '•'•time  was  at  hand''''  when  it  was  to 
be  fulfilled.  And  his  reply  is,  that  "  at  hand  "  in  scrip- 
tural st3-le  " docs  not  necessarily  mean  in  a  few  days,  or 
even  years."  The  Greek,  engus^  occurs  thirty  times  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  is  translated  nigh  fifteen  times, 
near  four  times,  from  once,  at  hand  ten  times,  and  in 
every  instance  the  word  refers  to  matters  that  were  near 
at  hand.  As  this  is  an  important  passage  I  will  read 
every  place  where  it  occurs,  emphasizing  the  English, 
that  is  rendered  from  engus.  "  Summer  is  nigh"  "  it  is 
nigh  even  at  the  door,"  "the  Master  saith,  'My  time  is 
at  hand^"  "that  summer  is  nigh"  "it  is  nigh.,  even  at 
the  door,"  "  he  was  7iigh  to  Jerusalem,"  "  summer  is 
now  at  hand"  " the  kingdom  of  God  is  nigh  at  hand" 
"  the  Jewish  passover  was  at  hand"  "  Enon  near  to 
Salim,"  " a  feast  of  the  Jews  was  at  hand"  " drawing 
nigh  unto  the  ship,"  '■'■  nigh  unto  the  place,"  "feast  of 
tabernacles  was  at  hand"  "  Bethany  was  nigh  unto 
Jerusalem,"  ^'- country  near  the  wilderness,"  "passover 
was  nigh  at  hand"  '•'•from  Jerusalem  a  Sabbath  day's 
journey,"  "the  sepulchre  was  nigh  at  hand"  "was 
crucified  ttigh  to  the  city,"  "  Lydda  was  nigh  tojoppa," 
"  nigh  whereunto  was  the  city,"  "  the  word  is  nigh  mito 
thee,"  "made  ;?/V/z  by  the  blood  of  Christ,"  "tothemy 
tliat  were  nigh"  "the  Lord  is  at  hand"  '-'•nigh  unto 


7o  Oral  Discussion. 

cursing,"  '''•ready  to  vanish  away,"  "the  time  is  at 
hand^''  "  the  time  is  at  hand" 

My  friend's  criticism  on  takti^  rendered  "  quickly "  in 
tlie  passage,  is  equally  unfortunate.  He  says,  "  It  may 
mean  no  more  than  rapidly  or  suddenly y  It  is  not  trans- 
lated once  in  the  New  Testament  by  either  of  those  words. 
Taku  occurs  thirteen  times,  and  is  always  rendered 
quickly^  save  in  one  place,  where  it  is  translated  lightly. 
I  will  quote  all  the  passages  where  it  occurs.  "  Agree 
with  thine  adversary  quickly"  "  go  quickly  and  tell  his 
disciples,"  "and  they  departed  quickly"  "'can  lightly 
speak  evil  of  me,"  "and  they  went  out  quickly"  "she 
arose  quickly"  "  I  will  come  unto  thee  quickly"  "I  will 
come  unto  thee  quickly"  "  behold,  I  come  quickly" 
"the  third  woe  cometh  quickly"  "behold,  I  come 
quickly"  "  behold,  I  come  quickly"  "  surely  I  come 
quicklyy 

You  see  the  absurdity  of  my  friend's  consti"uction  of 
this  passage.  It  was  written  nearly  two  thousand  years 
since.  Then  the  time  was  at  hand  when  it  was  to  be 
fulfilled ;  all  spoken  of  in  it  was  then  to  take  place  quick- 
ly^ and  yet  he  says  it  has  not  yet  been  fulfilled,  and  mil- 
lions of  centuries  may  yet  pass  away  before  it  will  be 
fulfilled !  Clearly,  the  passage  has  no  reference  what- 
ever to  what  he  applies  it. 

"  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins,"  said  Jesus  to  the  Jews  on 
a  certain  occasion.  I  will  ask  my  friend  a  question,  and 
I  hope  he  will  answer  it  yes,  or  no,  now,  or  in  his  next 
speech.  Do  you  believe  that  none  will  be  saved  in 
heaven  who  die  sinful?  I  shall  look  sharply  for  his 
answer.  Jesus  also  told  the  Jews,  "  Whither  I  go  ye 
cannot  come."  But  he  said  the  same  to  his  disciples, 
"  Little  children,  yet  a  little  while  I  am  with  you.     Ye 


Universal  Salvation.  71 

shall  seek  me;  and  as  I  said  to  the  yews,  '  Whither  I  go, 
ye  cannot  come,'  so  now  I  say  to  you."  John  xiii.  33. 
Now,  if  Jesus,  when  he  told  the  Jews  "Whither  I  go,  ye 
cannot  come,"  meant  they  never  could  be  saved,  then 
the  disciples  can  never  be  saved,  for  he  told  them  the 
same  thing.  He  simply  meant,  he  should  soon  leave  this 
world,  but  the  Jews  and  disciples  would  remain  in  this 
world.  He  did  not  tell  the  Jews  they  would  not  go  to  him 
because  they  would  die  in  their  sins.  He  did  not  say 
that,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  he  intended  to 
convey  such  an  idea. 

The  other  passage  he  read,  doubtless  refers  to  the  tak- 
ing of  the  kingdom  from  the  Jews,  and  giving  it  to  the 
Gentiles.  They  were  once  in  the  kingdom ;  but  as  they 
rejected  the  "grace  and  truth"  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ, 
they  were  thrust  out, — showing  they  were  once  in  the 
kingdom, — where  was  "  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth," 
words  indicating  their  indignation  and  wretched  condition, 
while  the  Gentiles,  who  "  gladly  received  tlie  words  of 
truth,"  took  their  place  in  the  kingdom.  But  those  same 
Jews  will  finally  re-enter  the  kingdom,  for,  in  the  sixth 
verse  following  the  passage  Mr.  55.  read,  the  Savior  said 
to  them,  "  Verily,  I  say  unto  you,  ye  shall  not  see  me, 
until  the  time  come  when  ye  shall  say,  '  Blessed  is  he 
that  Cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.'  "  Those  same 
persons,  then,  who  were  cast  out  of  the  kingdom  are  to 
be  restored.  This  passage  affords  the  gentlemen's  cause 
no  aid. 

It  was  proved  in  my  last  speech,  that  God  is  the  Father 
of  mankind.  One  evidence  offered  was,  that  Jesus 
instructs  us  to  pray,  "  Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven." 
The  gentleman  contends  that  God  is  not  the  Father  of 
sinners,  and  asks,  "  Were  s:nners  taught  to  pray  thus,  or 


72  Oral  Discussion. 

were  they  his  disciples?"  The  words  were  addressed 
directly  to  his  disciples ;  and  part,  at  least,  of  them  were 
sinners.  Judas  betrayed  Jesus,  and  Peter  lied,  and  uttered 
rather  profane  language  for  a  saint.  As  God  was  the 
Father  of  Peter  and  Judas,  sinners  as  they  were,  why 
may  he  not  be  the  Father  of  all  sinners.''  I  have 
already  showed  what  is  meant  by  being  the  children  of 
satan,  and  Mr.  S.  has  not  attempted  to  show  I  was 
wrong. 

I  offer  no  arguments  containing  only  "  one  premise." 
I  sometimes  state  a  proposition,  and  then  draw  inferences 
from  it.  I  said,  God  is  the  Governor  of  mankind; 
and  from  that  grand  fact,  inferred  that  his  government 
is  a  wise,  just  and  benevolent  government,  and  that  it 
would  result  in  the  greatest  good  to  all.  The  gentleman, 
seemingly,  does  not  like  to  have  old  split-foot  robbed  of 
his  glory,  and  so  asserts,  that  God's  government  is  not 
universal — he  has  given  part  of  the  government  to  fhe 
devil  —  they  governing  in  partnership.  My  friend  is 
behind  the  times.  He  lives  in  the  dark  ages.  Wonder 
if  he  does  not  believe  in  witchcraft! 

Christ  said,  as  has  been  noticed,  that  the  law  —  the 
ceremonial  and  moral  —  shall  be  fulfilled.  He  fulfilled 
the  ceremonial  law  when  he  was  on  earth.  But  his  mis- 
sion is  also  to  save  the  world,  and  thereby  cause  the 
moral  law  to  be  fulfilled.  When  all  shall  become  the 
children  of  God  morally,  in  the  image  of  God  morally, 
the  law  will  be  fulfilled  in  every  soul.  Love,  which  "  is 
the  fulfilling  of  the  law,"  will  be  the  law  of  every  soul. 

I  will  offer  some  additional  arguments  for  the  restitu- 
tion of  the  sinful  world. 

X.  That  God's  knowledge  is  infinite,  is  a  thesis  of 
Revelation  and  of  reason.     I  will  read  some  of  the  Bible 


Universal  Salvation.  73 

testimony  on  this  subject.  "  Why  seeing  times  are  not 
hid  from  the  Ahiiighty."  Job  xxiv.  i.  "I  am  God, 
and  there  is  none  else,  declaring  the  end  from  the  begin- 
ning, and  from  ancient  times  the  things  that  are  not  yet 
done."  Isa.  xlvi.  9,  10.  "  Known  unto  God  are  all  his 
works  from  the  beginning  of  the  world."  Acts  xv.  18. 
As  God's  knowledge  embraces  the  past,  the  present,  and 
the  future,  the  destiny  of  every  individual  of  Adam's  race 
is  perfectly  known  to  him.  If  some  will  sink  into  hell 
to  rise  no  more,  God  knows  who  they  are,  where  they 
are,  what  are  their  names,  where  they  were  born,  and 
when  he  will  force  them  to  make  the  fearful  plunge. 
Now,  would  a  God  of  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Mercy  and 
Justice,  have  given  being  to  millions  on  millions  of 
immortal  spirits,  knowing  that  endless  hell  torments 
would  be  their  sure  doom  }  I  have  too  exalted  an  opin- 
ion of  my  God  to  assent  to  such  a  monstrous  thought. 
Yet,  that  is  just  what  Mr.  Sweeney  advocates!  He 
must  be  mistaken,  or  God  is  a  demon. 

Surely,  the  God  that  Jesus  revealed  by  his  Life,  his 
Character,  and  his  Words,  must  have  knoivtt  that  our 
existence  would  be  a  blessing  to  us,  or  he  would  not 
have  conferred  it.  True,  he  knew  we  should  sin,  and 
suffer,  and  die;  but  he  also  knew  that  sin,  suffering  and 
death  would  end;  and  beyond  them  all,  would  be 
righteousness,  happiness,/-and  immortal  life.  He  knew 
that  evil  was  transient,  and  would  be  succeeded  by  an 
eternity  of  good.  Knowing  all  this — knowing  the  end 
from  the  beginning — infinite  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Mercy 
and  Justice,  rejoiced  in  the  creation  of  man.  But  they 
would  have  wept  if  hell  was  to  be  the  final  home  of 
countless  millions.  From  God's  knowledge,  then,  I 
draw  an  argument  for  the  restoration  of  mankind. 
7 


74  Oral  Discussion. 

XL  God  is  the  Father  of  mankind.  "  Have  we  not 
*  all  one  father?  Hath  not  one  God  created  us?  Why 
do  we  deal  treacherously  every  man  against  his  brother, 
by  profaning  the  covenant  of  our  fathei's  ?  "  Mai.  ii.  lo. 
From  this  passage  we  learn  that  God  is  the  Father  of 
all  men,  even  of  those  who  deal  "treacherously,"  and 
"■profime  the  covenant  of  our  fathers."  The  Gentile 
apostle  told  the  citizens  of  pagan  Athens  that  "  God 
hath  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men  that  dwell 
on  all  the  face  of  the  earth;  *  *  *  he  is  not  far 
from  every  one  of  us :  for  in  him  we  live,  and  move, 
and  have  our  being;  as  certain  also  of  your  poets  have 
said,  '  For  we  are  also  his  offspring.^ "  Acts  xvii.  26-29. 
The  apostle  sanctions  the  noble  sentiment  of  the  heathen 
poet,  that  mankind  are  the  offspring  of  God,  and  he 
consequently  their  Father.  Alas,  some  christians  are  not 
as  enlightened  as  the  heathen  on  that  subject,  for  many 
of  them  contend,  that  millions  of  mankind  are  the  off- 
spring of  satan.  Such  persons  need  christianizing. 
The  Lord  thus  addresses  the  wicked,  "  Return,  ye  back- 
sliding children."  Jer.  iii.  21.  Those  who  have  tasted 
the  good  things  of  the  kingdom,  and  returned  to  the 
world,  are  more  blamable  than  those  who  have  never 
professed  Christ.  And  if  they  ai'e  still  God's  children, 
/^  the  less  sinful  surely  must  be.  Again,  "One  God  and 
Father  of  all^  who  is  above  all,  and  through  all,  and  in 
you  all."  Eph.  iv.  6.  It  is,  then,  certain  that  "  God  is 
the  Father  of  all." 

It  is  true,  the  wicked  are  termed  the  "children  of 
satan,"  and  they  are  morally.^  but  not  by  nature.  The 
devil  is  not  the  author  of  their  being.  Wicked  men  are 
said  to  be  the  children  of  satan  in  the  same  sense  that 
some  persons  are  called  the  "  sons  of  peace,"  "  sons  of 


Universal  Salvation.  75 

consolation,"  "  children  of  disobedience,"  "  children  of 
wisdom,"  "  sons  of  thunder,"  "  sons  of  murder."  That 
is,  they  resemble  those  qualities.  So  sinful  men,  being 
sinful,  are  said  to  be  children  of  satan  or  sin.  But,  at 
the  same  time,  and  at  all  times,  the  bad,  as  well  as  the 
good,  are,  in  their  origin,  and  elements  of  their  being, 
the  children  of  God.  So  teaches  the  Bible,  so  teaches 
philosophy. 

The  parental  tie  cannot  be  severed.  Sons  and  daugh- 
ters may  disobey,  may  forsake  their  parents,  but  all  that 
does  not  make  them  any  less  their  offspring.  So  God's 
children  may  be  unfaithful,  wayward,  prodigal,  but  still 
he  is  their  Father.  Jesus  illustrates  this  foct  in  one' of  his 
instructive  parables.  A  son  left  his  father  and  father's 
house,  became  debased,  degraded,  and  sunk  into  the 
lowest  hell.  But  he  finally  returned  to  his  father,  as  I 
trust  all  prodigals  finally  will,  and  his  parent  joyfully 
exclaimed,  " This  my  son  was  dead,  but  is  alive  again; 
he  was  lost,  but  is  found."  When  this  prodigal  was  lost^ 
was  dead,  he  was  as  surely  the  son  of  the  good  man  as 
when  he  was  found,  alive.  He  was  his  son  before  he 
left  home,  when  herding  with  swine,  and  when  he 
returned.  What  is  true  of  that  prodigal  is  true  of  all 
prodigals.  This  youth,  when  wallowing  in  the  mire  of 
hell,  wa?  not  morally  the  son  of  that  righteous  man, 
but  he  was  naturally.  So,  sinful  men  are  not  morally 
the  children  of  God,  but  they  surely  are  naturally. 

God  is  now,  and  ever  will  be,  the  Father  of  all  man- 
kind. Neither  sin,  death,  the  grave,  or  eternity,  can 
sever  that  relation.  It  is  immutable  and  eternal.  As 
God  is  the  Father  of  all  now,  he  blesses  all  now.  And 
as  he  eternally  will  be  the  Father  of  all,  he  eternally  will 
bless  all.     Can  this  conclusion   be  false.''     His  fatherly 


76  Oral  Discussion. 

care  provides  us  with  innumerable  blessings  as  we 
journey  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave.  But,  as  soon  as 
millions  enter  the  unseen  world,  will  all  these  fatherly- 
blessings  be  turned  into  bitter  curses?  Will  all  love, 
mercy,  goodness,  be  withdrawn  from  them,  and  that  too 
by  their  heavenly  Father,  and  they  banished  to  eternal 
sorrow,  despair,  and  death  ?  Let  us  not  forget  the  words 
of  our  heavenly  Parent,  "Can  a  woman  forget  her  suck- 
ing child,  that  she  should  not  have  compassion  on  the 
son  of  her  womb  ?  Yea,  she  may  forget,  yet  will  I  not 
FORGET  THEE."  Isa.  iv.  15.  It  is  barely  possible  for 
the  mother  to  forget  her  child,  but  it  is  impossible  for 
God  to  forget  his.  '  The  good  mother  punishes  her  erring 
child,  because  she  loves  him,  and  for  his  good.  So,  our 
heavenly  Parent  punishes  his  erring  children  because  he 
loves  them,  and  for  their  good.  But,  God  forbid  that 
w^-should  entertain  the  dreadful  thought  that  the  Father 
i)f  our  spirits  will  ever  deal  worse  with  us  than  the  most 
degraded,  the  most  cruel,  the  most  brutal  savage  that 
ever  walked  the  earth  deals  with  his  most  hated  foe. 
Let  us  not  for  a  moment  harbor  the  wicked  thought, 
that  he  will  fill  hell  with  his  own  children,  and  that  all 
heaven  will  say  amen  to  the  dreadful  deed.  \Time 
expired. 

[mr.  Sweeney's  third  reply.] 

The  gentleman  mistakes  me :  I  care  not  how  much  he 
talks  about  the  "  fires  of  hell,"  provided  only  that  he 
will  talk  soberly,  sensibly,  and  scripturally.  Perhaps  it 
would  be  well  for  him  to  so  think  as  well  as  talk 
about  the  matter.  It  is  possible,  however,  for  one  to 
repeat  to   satiety   his   own  extravagant  and    distorted 


Universal  Salvation.  *jj 

representations  of  this  or  any  other  scripture  subject. 
How  often  he  has  used  the  scripture  word  "  hell,"  in 
his  speeches  already  I  will  not  attempt  to  say ;  but  has 
he  attempted  to  show  what  is  the  scripture  teaching  upon 
that  subject?  to  impart  any  light  to  us  upon  the  subject? 
Has  he  not  rather  seemed  to  treat  the  whole  subject  as 
if  it  were  no  more  than  a  mere  theological  bugbear,  a 
grand  farce?  This  is  what  I  objected  to.  Does  he  call  it 
argument?  If  so,  could  he  not  with  equal  logical  pro- 
priety argue  in  the  same  way  that  there  need  be  no  fear 
in  this  country  of  capital  punishment?  This  matter 
shall  have  due  attention  at  the  proper  time.  Now,  we 
are  on  a  different  question — the  reconciliation  and  salva- 
tion of  "  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  " — and  the  gen- 
tleman is  himself  in  the  affirmative.  Can  he  not  address 
himself  to  the  question  ?  Or  must  he  fill  up  his  time 
talking  of  irrelevant  matters? 

It  is  insisted  that  many  of  my  brethren  are  annihila- 
tionists.  One  Mr.  Russell,  for  instance,  with  whom,  it 
seems,  my  opponent  had  two  debates,  advocated  this 
theoiy.  I  cannot  imagine  who  that  Russell  was,  unless 
it  was  P.  T.  Russell,  who  is  known  in  this  country 
as  the  author  of  a  work  against  the  annihilation 
theory!  Then  the  gentleman  insinuates  that  this  theory 
is  pretty  generally  advocated  in  our  religious  "Journals," 
some  "  three  or  four"  of  which  he  reads.  If  he  is  seri- 
ous in  pressing  this  charge — and  I  begin  to  suspect  he 
is — then  I  call  for  the  papers.  I  most  positively  deny 
that  he  has  any  sufficient  authority  for  such  a  charge. 
Now,  Sir,  let  us  have  your  authority,  or  no  more  of  the 
charge,  otherwise  I  shall  feel  constrained  to  brand  it  as 
it  deserves  to  be.  But,  after  all,  what  has  this  matter  to 
do  with   the   proposition   he   is  here  to   prove?     Why 


78  Oral  Discussion. 

should  he  spend  his  time  on  it?     Is  it  because  it  is  easier 
to  talk  about?     This  might  be  suspected. 

I  did  not  say,  neither  do  I  believe,  that  God  burned 
up  the  Sodomites,  "  soul  as  well  as  body."  I  simply 
said,  "  he  did  make  a  pile  of  ashes  "  of  them,  and  that 
the  gentleman  admits.  God  burned  up  their  bodies,  but 
as  for  their  souls,  Mr.  Manford  says,  "  He  took  the?7i 
away  from  this  world  as  he  saw  goody  Yes,  but  "as  he 
SVLW  good"  for  whom  ?  And  where  did  he  take  them 
away  to  ?  He  took  them  away  from  this  world,  we 
agree.  I  deny  that  he  took  them  to  heaven.  What  says 
my  opponent?  They  left  this  world  sinful.  I  suppose 
we  will  agree  about  that.  Now,  if  the  gentleman  be- 
lieves they  went  directly  to  heaven,  let  him  say  so ;  and 
then  we  will  understand  how  they  were  reconciled  to 
God  and  saved.  If  they  did  not  go  to  heaven,  then 
where  did  they  go?  If  he  can  make  us  understand  just 
xvhere  they  went,  and  that  there  they  will  have,  and  will 
certainly  improve,  the  opportunity  to  be  reconciled  to 
God  and  saved,  then  he  will  have  an  argument  worth 
the  naming  and  numbering. 

Mr.  Manford  says  "  we  make  our  own  hells,"  but 
"  God  will  not  compel  any  one  to  suffer  the  pains  of  hell 
eternally."  Wonder  what  he  means  by  "  eternally "  ? 
Perhaps,  however,  that  is  an  impertinent  question,  and 
I  will  not  now  press  it  further.  Does  God  "  compel  any 
one  to  suffer  the  pains  of  hell"  during  this  life?  Of 
course  my  friend  will  say  no.  But  do  not  many  suffer 
the  pains  of  hell  during  this  life,  and  die  in  his  hell  ?  The 
gentleman  thinks  there  is  always  "redemption  from 
thence."  What!  in  the  future  world?  Here  is  where 
I  want  proof.  This  is  the  precise  point  at  which  the 
proof  is   needed,   and  demanded.     There  are  doubtless 


Universal  Salvation.  79 

some  of  my  friend's  hearers  who  arc  c;'i^■ing  ahriost 
breathless  attention  to  hear  his  proof  just  at  this  point. 
And  they  are  told,  "  David  was  delivered  from  tlic  low- 
est hell."  Yes;  but  that  was  all  in  this  world;  and 
there  is  no  question  about  there  being  deliverance  in  this 
world.  It  should  be  remembered  the  debate  is  about 
those  who  leave  this  world  sinful.  Who  was  ever  de- 
livered from  the  lowest  hell  in  another  world  ?  Here  is 
where  my  friend  is  without  scriptui^e  authority.  Yes ; 
and  he  is  without  even  good  Universalist  authority.  Let  us 
see.  Hosea  Balioit  says :  "  The  common  doctrine  which 
teaches  us  that  Christ  Jesus  came  into  this  world  to  save 
us  in  another  -world  is  contrary  to  all  the  representations 
which  are  found  in  the  Scriptures."  Lecture  Sermons^ 
page  17.  And  Mr.  Manford  is  found  advocating  that 
very  doctrine  which,  according  to  Mr.  Ballou,  "  is  con- 
trary to  all  the  representations  which  arc  found  in  the 
Scriptures."  Why !  he  is  not  even  a  sovuid  Universalist. 
I  am  afraid  Spiritism  has  been  working  on  him. 

The  gentleman  seems  still  a  little  troubled  about 
infants.  He  is  afraid  I  preach  infant  damnation.  I  can 
scarcely  believe  he  is  serious  about  the  matter.  I  must 
answer,  "  yes  or  no,  this  question :  Do  you  believe  that 
any  of  mankind  are  born  sinful .'' "  No.  Now  let  him 
come  on  with  consequences.     I  shall  hy  to  be  present. 

Mr.  Manford  tells  us,  "  Salvation  is  deliverance  from 
the  imperfections  of  earth,"  and  asks  if  that  is  a  defini- 
tion "  sharp  enough."  Well,  it  is  so  much  better  than 
I  expected  to  get  that  I  am  not  at  all  inclined  to  com- 
plain. I  am  appi-ehensive,  though,  that  he  will  have  to 
give  us  another  definition,  or  tinker  this  one  considerably. 
When  the  Lord  said,  "  He  that  believes  and  is  baptized 
shall   be  saved,"  he  meant,    He    that  believes    and   is 


So  Oral  Discussion. 

baptized  shall  be  delivered  from  the  imperfections  of 
earth!  And  when  Paul  said  to  the  Ephcsians,  "Ye 
are  saved,"  he  meant,  Ye  are  delivered  from  the  im- 
perfections of  earth!  And,  again,  when  he  said  to 
Titus,  "  He  saved  us,  by  the  washing  of  regeneration 
and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  he  meant.  He 
delivered  us  from  the  imperfections  of  earth  by  the  wash- 
ing of  regeneration  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost!!  When  Peter  said,  "Baptism  now  saves  us," 
instead  of  saying,  "  not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of 
the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  toward 
God,"  he  should  have  said,  not  the  answer  of  a  good 
conscience,  but  deliverance  from  the  imperfections  of 
earth ! !  And,  now,  let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  that  our 
discussion  is  about  the  reconciliation  and  salvation  of 
such  as  leave  this  world — this  earth — sinful.  Will  their 
salvation,  if  they  are  ever  saved,  consist  in  deliverance 
from  the  imperfections  of  earth  ?  Certainly  if  they  are 
delivered  from  anything  it  will  not  be  the  imperfections 
of  earth. 

The  gentleman  will  do  well  to  explain  what  he  means 
by  saying,  "  Christ  was  good  relatively."  I  thought 
Christ  "  hzezv  no  sin" 

If  I  do  not  "  garble  Mr.  Ballou,"  then  the  gentleman 
does  "  not  subscribe  to  all  he  says."  Well,  the  question 
as  to  whether  or  not  I  "garble"  him,  can  be  easily 
settled.  Here  are  the  books  from  which  I  read;  / 
bought  them  from  Air.  Manford.,  upon  his  recommenda- 
tion. Does  he  recommend  and  sell  that  to  which  he 
does  "  not  subscribe  " .'' 

The  worthy  gentleman  tells  us  that  he  believes  both 
in  man's  freedom  and  God's  sovereignty.  So  do  I.  He 
believes  that   "  God  saves  the  sinner  only  through  the 


Universal  Salvation.  8i 

sinner's  will."  I  agree  with  him  again.  But,  if  this  be 
so,  why  talk  about  the  will,  purpose,  and  desire  of  God  ? 
If  "  God  saves  the  sinner  only  through  the  sinner's  will," 
then,  of  course,  God  has  no  absolute  will  in  the  case,  as 
is  assumed  when  men  ai'gue  universal  salvation  from 
the  will  of  God.  Since  the  gentleman  admits  that  the 
sinner's  salvation  depends  upon  his  will,  he  must  prove 
that  he  will  eternally  have  the  power  to  will  in  the  case, 
and  that  he  will,  at  some  future  day,  certainly  exercise 
that  power.  All  this  he  must  prove  before  he  has  an 
argument.  But  he  cannot  prove  that  the  sinner  will 
always  have  the  jDower  to  will.  No  man  can  do  it. 
Here,  therefore,  his  failure  is  manifest.  He  has  no  scrip- 
ture, and  reason  is  against  him.  Many  persons  very  much 
impair,  if  not  entirely  destroy,  their  own  will-power 
even  in  this  short  lifetime.  And,  my  friends,  this  is  a 
terribly  solemn  reflection;  one  that  should  admonish  us 
not  to  trifle  for  one  moment  with  the  power  of  volition. 
God  will  always  be  love,  goodness,  and  mercy ;  but  we 
may  not  always  be  just  what  we  are  now,  as  to  the 
power  of  loving,  willing,  and  doing.  I  would  therefore 
admonish  the  sinner  that  noiv  is  the  time  to  will,  and 
love,  and  obey,  as  it  may  one  day  be  too  late.     It  is  true, 

No  word  of  doom  may  shut  thee  out, 
No  wind  of  wrath  may  downward  whirl, 
No  swords  of  fire  keep  watch  about 
The  open  gates  of  pearl ; 
A  tenderer  light  than  moon  or  sun, 
Than  song  of  earth  a  sweeter  hymn, 
May  shine  and  sound  forever  on, 
And  thou  be  deaf  and  dim. 
Forever  round  the  mercy  seat 
The  guiding  lights  of  love  shall  burn ; 
But  what  if,  hahit-bound,  thy  feet 


83  Oral  Discussion. 

Shall  lack  the  will  to  turn  ? 
What  if  thine  eye  refuse  to  see, 
Thine  ear  of  heaven's  free-welcome  fail, 
And  thou  a  •willing  captive  be, 
Thyself  thy  own  dark  jail  ? " 

The  gentleman  thinks,  or  affects  to  think,  I  "  have  a 
spite  at  poor  sinners,"  and  improve  every  opportunity 
"  to  give  them  a  kick,"  to  use  his  own  choice  language. 
Let  me  assure  him,  however,  that  he  is  laboring  under  a 
very  great  mistake  about  that  matter.  What  have  I  said 
that  affords  grounds  for  such  an  insinuation?  My  hear- 
ers may  judge.  I  preach  that  sinners  are  lost,  and  Christ 
told  them  so.  I  preach  that  except  tliey  repent  they 
will  perish,  and  did  not  our  Savior  teach  so?  I  preach 
that  God  "  fzoxv  commands  all  men  everywhere  to 
repent ; "  that  ?tow  is  an  acceptable  and  safe  time  to  tui"n 
unto  the  Lord ;  that 

"  To-morrow  is  with  God  alone, 
And  man  hath  but  to-day." 

And  does  not  this  great  truth  float  upon  the  very  sur- 
face of  all  scripture  teaching  upon  the  subject?  But 
Mr.  M.  tells  the  sinner  that  if  he  does  not  choose  to  turn 
now,  he  can  do  so  when  he  has  a  "  more  convenient  sea- 
son"; if  not  to-day,  he  can  to-morrow;  if  not  in  this 
"  age,"  he  can  in  the  next  age;  or  if  not  in  the  next  age, 
he  can  do  so  at  his  eterjzal  leisure — in  any  of  the  on- 
coming ages  of  eternity !  And  under  the  influence  of 
such  teaching  the  habit-bound  sinner  may  afford  to  sit 
down  and  sing  away  his  whole  lifetime: 

"Spare  me  awhile;  the  flesh  is  weak. 
These  lingering  feet,  that  fain  would  stray 
Among  the  flowers,  shall  some  day  seek 
The  strait  and  narrow  way." 


Universal  Salvation.  ■  83 

And  yet  the  gentleman  claims  to  be  the  special  and  real 
friend  of  sinners.  I  do  not  doubt  that  he  feels — that  he 
is — friendly  to  sinners;  but  I  dare  not  say  so  much  for 
what  he  teaches.  It  is  well,  is  right,  is  Christ-like,  is 
God-like,  to  love  sinners;  but  not  because  they  are  sin- 
ners. We  must  not  love  sin.  We  must  give  none 
encouragement  to  live  in  sin.  We  dare  utter  no  word 
of  hope  to  him  who  ■will  live  in  sin. 

The  story  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican  is  a  very 
fine  thing  properly  understood  and  applied,  but  like 
every  other  good  thing  it  may  be  abused.  What  one  of 
his  hearers  saw  how  my  friend  made  me  out  like  the 
Pharisee,  and  himself  like  the  humble  publican,  who 
was  commended  by  Jesus.'' 

True,  "Jesus  always  had  a  kind  word  for  sinners" — 
especially  penitent  sinners — but  not  because  they  were 
sinners.  He  had  no  kind  words  for  sin;  nor  one  word 
of  hope  for  him  who  would  live  and  die  in  his  sins — no 
promise  for  such  as  "leave  this  world  sinful."  Such 
as  wish  to  lay  the  question  of  repentance  upon  the  table, 
to  be  taken  up  in  eternity,  and  to  spend  all  this  life  in 
sin,  CcUi  find  more  to  encourage  them  in  any  one  of  Mr. 
Manford's  speeches  than  in  the  whole  Bible.  The  Bible 
encourages  no  one  "  to  leave  this  world  sinful." 

I  like  to  see  whatever  is  done  handsomely  done,  even 
if  it  is  but  the  perpetration  of  a  quibble.  The  gentle- 
man certainly  quibbled  quite  handsomely  in  trying  to 
make  it  appear  that,  according  to  my  teaching,  most  of 
our  race  will  be  not  merely  allowed  but  compelled  to 
rebel  against  God  and  despise  his  mercy  to  all  eternity. 
His  effort  was,  of  course,  only  a  quibble.  Mr.  Manford 
ought  to  know  I  teach  no  such  thing.  To  "rebel"  is 
from  the  latin  rebello^  and  means  "  to  make  war  again." 


r 


84  Oral  Discussion. 

"Despise"  is  from  a  word  meaning  "to  tread  down," 
"  to  abhor."  Do  I  teach  tliat  God  will  compel,  or  even 
allow,  one  of  his  creatures  to  make  war  against  him 
again,  and  again,  to  all  eternity ;  and  to  tread  dowjt^  and 
to  abhor ^  his  mercy  forever?  Certainly  not.  Christ 
"  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his  feet." 
Then  the  war  will  be  over  forever.  But  my  friend  says 
the  sinner  will  "e/er;2a//y  have  the  opportunity  tore- 
pent."  This  implies  that  he  may  eternally  rebel  against 
God  and  despise  his  mercy.  Such  a  proclamation  made 
from  heaven  would,  I  fear,  demoralize  and  disorganize 
the  whole  universe. 

The  passage  of  scripture  I  referred  to  in  Revelations — 
"  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still  "  — seems  to  give 
my  friend  much  and  very  serious  trouble.  I  know  the 
word  engus^  rendered  "  at  hand"  in  the  context,  generally 
means  "nigh,"  in  the  New  Testament,  and  in  classic 
Greek  literature.  It  is  accordingly  defined  by  the  lexicons 
to  mean  "  near,  nigh,  at  hand,  close,  next."  And  when 
we  look  at  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  the  end  of  his 
mediatorial  reign,  as  they  stand  related  to  our  interests 
beyond,  to  eternity^  we  may  truly  say,  and  feel,  "  the  time 
is  at  hand,  even  at  the  door."  A  few  thousand  years  are 
but  as  a  few  days  compared  with  eternity.  I  know  also, 
that  taku^  rendered  "  quickly,"  in  the  passage,  does  ordi- 
narily mean  quickly.  But,  as  I  said  before,  it  may 
mean  no  more  than  rapidly,  or  suddenly.  Such  is  its 
etymological  force.  It  is  defined  by  the  lexicons  — 
"quickly,  speedily,  rapidly;"  and  takeos^  which  is 
from  the  same  root,  is  translated  "  suddenly,"  in  i  Tim. 
V.  23.  So  that  the  gentleman  gains  nothing  from  his 
labored  criticism  of  these  two  words.  The  Lord's 
coming  is  nigh,  and,  compared  with  eternity,  always  has 


Universal  Salvation.  85 

been  nigh ;  and  he  will  come  suddenly.  Then,  and  not 
till  then,  will  it  be  said  by  the  Judge  of  all  —  "  He  that 
is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still."  What  if  "  these  words 
were  written  two  thousand  years  ago,"  and  it  was  then 
said  "  the  time  is  at  hand."  Has  the  time  come  ?  That's 
the  question.  Has  the  proclamation — "  He  that  is  filthy, 
let  him  be  filthy  still " — gone  forth .?  When  did  it  go  forth  } 
W/ien,  if  ever,  was  it  revoked  ?  If  not  revoked,  why 
should  not  he  that  heareth,  instead  of  saying  "  come," 
say  "  be  filthy  still"  ?  These  are  questions  the  gentleman 
must  answer  as  he  passes  over  the  river  of  his  difficulties. 

I  called  the  gentleman's  attention  to  John  viii.  3i, 
where  the  Savior  said  to  the  Jews  who  were  determined 
not  to  believe  on  him :  "  I  go  my  way,  and  ye  shall  seek 
me,  and  shall  die  in  your  sins;  whither  I  go,  ye  cannot 
come."  And  what  was  his  reply.''  Why,  he  simply 
repeated  a  part  of  the  language — "  Whither  I  go,  ye  can- 
not come" — and  informed  us  that  Christ  said  the  same 
to  his  disciples,  as  recorded  John  xiii.  33.  Did  Jesus  say 
to  his  disciples,  "Ye  shall  die  in  yoicr  sins"  9  I  think 
not.  True,  he  said  to  his  disciples  as  he  did  to  the  Jews, 
"whither  I  go,  ye  cannot  come;"  but  he  immediately 
explained  to  them,  "  Whither  I  go,  thou  canst  not  follow 
me  now;  but  thou  shall  follow  me  afterwards"  Did 
he  so  explain  to  the  Jews,  who,  he  said,  should  die  in 
their  sins.''  If  he  ever  so  explained  to  them  I  have  not 
learned  the  fact.  My  friend  seems  determined  to  have 
the  very  best  men  in  the  world,  christians  and  even 
infants,  stand  precisely  In  the  same  relation  to  the  prom- 
ises of  God,  as  do  such  as  die  in  their  sins,  as  do  "  all 
who  leave  this  world  sinful"  ! 

By  the  words,  "  I  go  my  way,"  Mr.  Manford  says  the 
Savior  "  simply  meant,  he  should  soon  leave  this  world." 


86  Oral  Discussion. 

Of  course  he  meant  he  would  " /ca^e  this  world;"  but 
tvhere  was  he  going  to?  '"''^go  my  way  " — that  is,  I  go  to 
my  Father,  I  go  to  heaven — '•  I  am  not  of  this  world."  "  I 
am  from  above."  Then  the  Savior  told  the  Jews  that  he 
was  going  to  heaven;  but  that  they,  on  account  of  their 
determined  unbelief,  should  die  in  their  sins,  and  should 
not  go  to  heaven.  Here  we  have  a  case  just  to  the  point. 
Here  were  persons  who  the  Savior  said  would  "  leave 
this  world  sinful ; "  and  he  said  they  could  not  go  to  hea- 
ven. My  friend  says  they  could.,  and  did!  But  the 
gentleman  says,  "  he  did  not  tell  the  Jews  they  would 
not  go  to  him  because  they  would  die  in  their  sins." 
Indeed !  Because  of  what  then  were  they  not  to  go  to 
him .?     Will  he  tell  us .? 

Because  I  say  that  God  does  not  govern  all  men,  the 
gentleman  represents  me  as  teaching  that  God  has  divid- 
ed the  government  of  the  world  with  Satan,  and  calls 
it  "  Persian  philosophy."  God  has  not  divided  his  gov- 
ernment with  Satan,  but  thousands  of  men  have  refused 
to  submit  to  the  government  of  God,  and  are,  hence,  not 
under  his  government,  but  are  governed  by  Satan.  If 
this  be  Persian  philosophy,  then  the  apostles  were  Persian 
philosophers,  and  our  Savior  himself  was  a  Persian  phi- 
losopher. But  my  friend  does  not  even  preach  good 
Persian  philosophy,  or  any  other  kind.  He  says  God 
governs  all  men;  and  what  a  government  it  is!  No 
pagan  philosopher  ever  had  so  low  a  conception  of  his 
God  as  the  gentleman  seems  to  have  of  his! 

X.  The  tenth  argument  is  drawn  from  the  "  Knowl- 
edge of  God." 

The  gentleman  says.  If  any  are  to  suffer  endless  pun- 
ishment, "  God  knows  who  they  are,  where  they  are, 
what  are  their  names,  where  they  were  born,  and  when 


Universal  Salvation.  87 

he  vjill  force  them  to  make  the  fearful  plunge."  Then 
he  concludes  that  a  God  of  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Justice 
and  Mercy,  "  would  not  have  given  being  to  millions  on 
millions  of  immortal  spirits,  knowing  that  endless  hell 
torments  would  be  their  sure  doom." 

Well,  I  suppose — as  the  gentleman  does  not  subscribe 
to  Mr.  Ballou's  doctrine,  that  there  is  no  evil  —  he  will 
admit  that  evil  and  suffering  are  in  the  world  now ;  that 
there  are  millions  on  millions  of  God's  creatures  that  are 
sufferers  now,  and  that  it  has  been  so  for  several  thousand 
years.  Now,  if  there  are  sufferers  in  this  world,  "  God 
knows  who  they  are,  where  they  are,  what  are  their 
names,  where  they  were  born,  and  when  he  forced  them 
to  take  the  fearful  plunge,"  And,  now,  "would  a  God 
of  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Mercy  and  Justice,  have  given 
being  to  millions  on  millions  of  immortal  spirits,  know- 
ing that  a  life  of  hell  torments  would  be  their  sure 
doom } "  Here  we  have  levelled  the  gentleman's  argu- 
ment against  the  existence  of  present  evil  and  suffering, 
but  still  evil  and  suffering  remain !  This  proves  that  the 
argument  is  in  fact  no  argument,  but  a  sophism. 

"  Why  did  God  create  men,  knowing  that  they  would 
be  eternally  lost  ?  "  How  often  I  have  heard  this  ques- 
tion, it  would  be  difficult  to  say.  Why  did  God  create 
men,  knowing  that  they  would  suffer  at  all?  Why  did 
God  allow  evil  to  come  into  the  universe }  Why  not 
restrain  it  in  its  very  incipiency.?  These  are  questions 
that  perhaps  no  one  can  answer,  even  to  his  own  satis- 
faction. But  the  fact  is  not  at  all  favorable  to  Univer- 
salism.  Universalists  can  no  more  satisfactorily  solve 
these  great  problems  than  other  people.  God  did  create. 
This  we  know.  Evil  and  misery  are  in  the  world.  This 
we  know  also.     But  in  connection  with  these  facts  there 


88  07'al  Discussloji. 

are  some  things  the  reason  of  which  h.es  a  httle  too  deep 
for  frail  mortals  such  as  we  are.  But  as  I  have  only  to 
follow  the  gentleman,  I  will  have  time  to  make  a  few 
remarks,  rather  suggestive  than  otherwise,  just  at  this 
point. 

I  submit,  that,  The  consciousness  of  having  done  the 
right  from  choice^  is  the  law  of  human  happiness.  The 
consciousness  of  having  done  wrong,  affords  us  no  hap- 
piness. Neither  does  the  consciousness  of  having  done 
right  from  compulsion  or  necessity.  Neither  does  the 
consciousness  of  having  done  nothing.  I  suppose  my 
friend  will  agree  with  me  as  to  what  I  have  called  the 
law  of  human  happiness.  Then  man,  as  God  has  made 
him,  and  as  we  know  he  is,  to  be  happy,  must  have  the 
power  of  choosing,  that  he  may  choose  the  right;  but, 
having  this  power,  he  may  choose  the  wrong,  and  suffer. 
The  power  of  choosing  being  necessary  to  man's  happi- 
ness ;  and  as  he  could  not,  have  been  made  capable  of 
choosing  the  right,  without  the  power  of  choosing  the 
wrong;  it  follows  that  man  could  not  have  been  made 
capable  of  being  happy  without  being,  at  the  same 
time,  capable  of  being  miserable.  I  cannot  see  how  a 
reaper  could  be  made  that  should  be  at  once  capable  of 
cutting  wheat  and  incapable  of  doing  any  harm. 
Indeed,  everything  that,  properly  used,  accomplishes 
good,  improperly  used  will  do  harm.  Now,  I  do 
not  mean  to  say  that  God  could  not  create  a  being 
capable  of  happiness,  without  being  at  the  same 
time  capable  of  unhappiness.  But  if  he  were  to  create 
such  a  being  it  would  not  be  jnati.  It  would  not  be  like 
man.  I  speak  of  man  as  he  zV,  and  of  what  we  know 
to  be  the  law  of  his  happiness. 

XI.     "  God  is  the  leather  of  mankind,"  is  a  statement 


Universal  Salvation.  89 

from  whicli  tlie  gentleman  adduces  his  eleventh  inference, 
called  his  eleventh  argument. 

He  quotes  from  the  prophet  Malachi — "  Have  we  not 
all  one  Father?  hath  not  one  God  created  us  all?" 
Now,  in  the  first  place,  it  would  be  scarcely  possible  for 
the  gentleman  to  show  that  the  prophet  meant  by  "  we" 
and  "  us,"  to  include  more  than  Jews,  the  peculiar  people 
of  God ;  and,  in  the  second  place,  he  speaks  of  God  as  a 
Father  only  in  the  sense  of  creation  —  "  Hath  not  one 
God  created  us  all  ?"  Paul's  discourse  at  Athens  is  also 
quoted  —  "God  h^alCa  made  oi  ono.  blood  all  nations  of 
men "  —  "  We  are  also  his  offspring."  All  that  these 
scriptures  teach,  is  accepted  as  fully  and  as  heartily  by 
christians  generally  as  by  Universalists.  And  I  was 
therefore  astonished  to  hear  the  learned  gentleman  assert 
with  so  much  seeming  surprise  that  many  christians  "  con- 
tend that  millions  of  mankind  are  the  offspring  of  satan." 
Now,  if  many  christians  so  contend,  it  will,  of  course,  be 
an  easy  matter  for  him  to  point  out  one^  and  that  one  is 
called  for.  What  christian  contends  that  millions  of 
mankind  are  the  offspring  of  Satan  ?  If  any  do  so  teach, 
then  I  am  ready  with  my  opponent  to  say  that,  "  such 
persons  need  chiistianizing."  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
christians  are,  in  this  statement,  only  misrepresented  by 
their  opponents,  then  I  shall  ask  him  to  join  me  in  say- 
ing of  the  latter,  '''-such  persons  need  christianizing." 
Will  he  do  it? 

Paul's  language  to  the  Ephesians — "  One  God  and 
Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all,  and  through  all,  and  in 
you  all" — the  gentleman  certainly  misapplies.  The 
Apostle  was  writing  to  christians,  and  evidently  addressed 
that  language  only  to  such ;  while  Mr.  M.  gives  it  a 
universal  application.  It  may  be  properly  applied  only 
8 


90  Oral  Discussion. 

to  such  as  compose  the  "one  body,"  having  "one  Spirit., 
one  hope  of  their  calling ;  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one 
baptism,"  God  is  the  Father  of  those  having  "one 
Spirit''''  in  a  sense  that  he  is  not  the  Father  of  such  as 
have  not  "  the  spirit  of  adoption,  by  which  we  ciy.  Fa- 
ther., Father"  In  order  to  receive  this  Spirit,  and  hence 
to  be  a  cliild  of  God  in  a  spiritual  sense,  one  "  must  be 
born  again" — "of  water  and  of  the  Spirit."  See  John 
iii.  5.  Paul  says,  "They  which  are  the  children  of  the 
flesh,  these  are  not  the  children  of  God."  Rom.  ix.  8. 
Again :  "  For  as  many  as  arc  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
they  are  the  sons  of  God,"  Rom.  viii.  14,  To  be  the 
children  of  God  in  this  spiritual  sense,  persons  must  sub- 
mit to  the  government  of  God.  But  again,  Paul  says : 
"Ye  are  the  children  of  God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus." 
Gal.  iii.  26.  And  again:  "Wherefore  come  out  frx)m 
among  them  and  be  ye  separate^  saith  the  Lord,  and 
touch  not  the  unclean,  and  I  will  receive  you,  and  ye 
shall  be  my  sons  and  daughters."  2  Cor.  vi.  17,  18. 
God  himself  says :  "  He  that  overcometh  shall  inherit  all 
things,  and  I  will  be  his  God  and  he  shall  be  my  son." 
Rev.  xxi.  7.  In  this  high  sense,  this  spiritual  sense,  this 
sense  in  which  we  must  be  children  in  order  to  "  inherit 
all  things,"  all  are  not  children  of  God,  It  is  not 
sufficient  for  us  to  be  children  of  God  as  brutes  are.  Jesus 
once  said  to  certain  wicked  persons:  "7/"  God  were 
your  Father  ye  would  love  me;  *  *  *  yc  are  of 
your  father  the  devil.,  and  the  lusts  of  your  father  ye 
will  do."  John  viii.  42-44.  Again  he  said :  "  The  field 
is  the  world ;  the  good  seed  are  the  children  of  the  king- 
dom ;  but  the  tares  are  the  children  of  the  wicked  one." 
Matt.  xiii.  38.  The  Apostle  John,  who  had  as  high  and 
quite  as  just  conceptions  of  the  love  of  God  as  my  oppo- 


Universal  Salvation.  gi 

nent  has,  said :  "  In  this  the  children  of  God  are  manifest, 
and  the  children  of  the  devil:  wliosoever  doeth  not 
righteousness  is  not  of  God."  i  John  iii.  ro.  So  taught 
Jesus  and  the  Apostles;  and  I  believe  my  distinguished 
friend,  Mr.  M.,  pronounces  this  "  the  doctrine  of  Zoro- 
aster— Persian  philosophy."  If  he  is  correct  in  this, 
then  was  Zoroaster  a  better  teacher  than  he,  and  Persian 
philosophy  is  to  be  preferred  to  that  of  Murray,  or 
Ballou,  or  even  that  of  my  severely  philosophical  friend, 
Mr.  Manford. 

Granted,  that  all  men,  being  the  offspring  of  God,  are 
in  one  sense — that  of  creation — the  children  of  God; 
but  in  virtue  of  such  a  relation  men  do  not  "  inherit  all 
things"  —  spiritual  blessings — salvation.  All  are  now 
children  in  that  sense ;  but  all  are  not  7tow  reconciled  and 
saved ;  because  this  relation  of  itself  does  not  reconcile 
and  save  men — nor  luill  it  ever  do  so. 

The  gentlemen  tells  us,  "  the  parental  tie  cannot  be 
severed."  And  what  of  it.?  "The  parental  tie,"  of 
itself,  makes  no  child  happy  or  virtuous.  So/net hino- 
more  than  parental  love,  parental  goodness,  parental 
mercy,  and  parental  care,  is  necessary  to  the  happiness 
of  children.  Parents  may  most  fei-vently  love  and  most 
bountifully  provide  for  their  children,  but  they  cannot 
make  \}i\Q.n\  enjoy  ^wch  provision.  Alas!  how  painfully 
have  many  fond  parents  experienced  this.  And  if  it  is 
true,  as  Mr.  Manford  has  already  admitted,  that  "  God 
saves  the  sinner  only  through  the  sinner's  will"  then, 
with  the  profoundest  reverence,  it  may  be  said,  he  can- 
not compel  the  sinner  to  enjoy  the  pi-ovisions  of  his 
amazing  love  and  goodness.  The  sun  that  binds  to- 
gether and  flashes  light  and  glory  on  worlds,  has  not  the 
glory  with  which  God  has  crowned  his  creature,  man — 


92  Oral  Discussion. 

the  glory  of  volition — will.  Hence  it  is  that  he  is  at 
once  so  wonderfully  and  so  fearfully  made.  Then,  oh ! 
man!  turn  to  God.  Turn,  not  as  a  star  turns  in  the 
heavens — not  as  the  moon  turns  to  the  sun  of  its  light — 
not  as  the  sun  itself  turns  to  the  great  Sun  of  suns — but 
as  a  ma?i — as  a  free  man — turn  to  God  and  live. 

Why  does  my  opponent  persist  in  insinuating  that  I 
believe  that  God  will  after  awhile  turn  "fiend,"  or 
"  savage,"  and  '•'•force  some  of  his  creatures  into  an  end- 
less hell,"  contrary  to  the  feelings,  desires  and  purpose 
of  their  lives.''  Have  I  said  any  such  thing.'*  Have  I 
intimated  it  'i  Certainly  not.  I  do  not  believe  it.  We 
know  sinners  can  suffer,  can  be  in  hell,  and  God  remain 
just  as  he  is.  God  will  never  change.  No  sinner  will 
suffer  in  this  life  or  in  the  next  because  God  is  not  love, 
mercy,  and  goodness.  And  if  any  one  shall  ever  find 
himself  beyond  the  possibility  of  reconciliation  and  sal- 
vation, it  will  not  be  because  of  any  change  in  God,  or 
Chi-ist,  or  the  angels,  or  heaven,  or  love,  or  goodness. 
We  shall  see  more  about  this  when  we  come  to  discuss 
the  next  proposition.  The  gentleman  can  discuss  the 
present  qviestion  fairly,  or  if  he  choose  he  can  go  on 
making  distorted  and  ridiculous  statements.  "  The  wise 
shall  understand."  I  wish  only  a  fair  and  an  honorable 
discussion.     [  Time  expired. 


[mr.  manford's  fourth  speech.] 

My  friend  says  I  spoke  lightly  of  endless  hell-tor- 
ments. No  sir.  It  grieves  my  heart,  that  so  many  good 
men  and  women  think  so  wickedly  of  the  God  of  heaven 
as  to  represent  him  as  the  eternal  tormenter  of  countless 


Universal  Salvation. 


93 


millions,  made  in  his  own  adorable  image.  They  do 
not,  howev^er,  I  trust,  sin  willfully.  They  have  eyes,  but 
they  do  not  see  the  glory  of  God.  They  have  ears,  but 
they  do  not  hear  the  angelic  song,  "  Glory  to  God  in  the 
highest."  They  have  understanding,  but  they  know 
little  of  the  love  of  God.  It  is  an  awful  thing  to  repre- 
sent him  "who  is  good  unto  all"  as  crushing  beneath  his 
feet  his  own  offspring,  world  without  end.  And  to  make 
such  persons  reflect  on  the  enormity  of  the  charge  they 
bring  against  their  Creator,  I  speak  of  hell-torments  in 
pretty  plain  English.  I  do  not  whitewash  hell  inside  or 
outside.  I  do  not  put  masks  on  its  devils,  or  hide  them  in 
the  dark.  I  do  not  smother  its  fires  with  cologne,  or 
scent  its  brimstone  with  "  balm  of  a  thousand  flowers." 
I  talk  about  this  hell  just  as  the  creeds  talk  about  it;  just 
as  standard  orthodox  authors  talk  about  it.  I  want  to 
awaken  people  to  the  horrors  of  their  creed.  When 
they  see  it  as  it  is^  they  will  hate,  loathe,  abhor  it,  and 
banish  it  from  their  creeds,  their  heads,  and  their  hearts. 
I  am  glad  to  see  my  worthy  friend  so  uneasy,  when  I  talk 
thus  about  hell.  That  is  a  hopeful  sign.  He  is  getting 
his  eyes,  ears,  heart  and  head  open  to  see,  hear,  feel  and 
understand  its  horrors  and  abominations.  He  tries  hard 
to  hide  its  infamy,  and  make  it  appear  respectable,  and 
sort  of  comfortable.  But  by  the  help  of  God,  before 
this  discussion  closes,  I  will  expose  its  horrors,  its  injus- 
tice, and  its  cruelty.  It  is  worse  than  a  "theological 
bug-bear,"  or  "  a  grand  farce."  It  is  too  dreadful  to  be 
laughed  at,  or  spoken  of  lightly.  Belief  in  it  causes  too 
many  tears  to  flow,  too  many  hearts  to  ache,  and  sends 
too  many  of  our  brothers  and  sisters  to  early  graves. 
We  should  weep  rather  than  laugh  that  so  many  good 
men  and  women  cherish  so  heart-rending  a  creed.     May 


94  Oral  Discussion. 

God  have  mercy  on  them,  and  save  them  from  the  slav- 
ish fear  of  hell.  It  is  true,  the  Bible  talks  about  hells, 
and  ere  this  discussion  closes  I  hope  to  present  the 
Bible  doctrine  of  hell;  also  shall  try  to  gratify  my  friend 
relative  to  the  meaning  of  eternal.  These,  and  all  other 
imjDortant  matters,  relating  to  the  questions  before  us,  w^ill 
be  attended  to  at  the  proper  time. 

I  did  not  say  that  destructionism  is  "  generally  advocat- 
ed in  his  journals,"  but  that  it  has  advocates  in  them ;  and 
my  friend  knows  that  to  be  correct;  and  some  of  those 
advocates  are  members  of  his  denomination.  He  knows 
that  also  to  be  correct.  1  am  pleased  to  find  that  he 
discards  Mr.  Campbell's  notion,  that  we  come  from  the 
hands  of  our  Creator,  sinful.  If  Mr.  C.  is  right,  not  an 
infant  can  be  saved.  They  are  born  sinful,  live  sinful, 
die  sinful  —  so  Mr.  Campbell  teaches;  and  if  those  who 
"  leave  this  world  sinful "  cannot  be  saved,  as  Mr.  S. 
asserts,  not  a  child  can  be  saved.  Mr.  Campbell  and 
Mr.  Sweeney  together,  send  all  children  to  hell. 

I  said,  "  salvation  is  deliverance  from  the  imperfections 
of  earth,"  and  that  is  the  truth.  What  is  the  good  man 
saved  from,  if  not  from  the  imperfections  of  this  world  } 
The  Bible  reveals  no  evils  that  have  not  their  root  here. 
I  know  this  fact  cuts  my  friend's  theory  right  and  left. 
He  evidently  thinks,  that  the  evils  we  are  subject  to  did 
not  have  their  origin  in  this  world,  or  in  man,  but  came 
from  hell;  that  the  devil  hatched  them  there,  and 
brouglit  them  from  the  infernal  regions,  and  sowed  them 
broadcast  all  over  this  earth,  and  salvation  is  deliverance 
from  Satanic  principles,  Satanic  influence,  and  satanic 
rule.  The  gentleman  is  wrong,  and  St.  Paul  is  right, 
for  he  says,  "  Sin  is  the  work  of  the  Jlcsh"  and  St. 
James  says,  "  Every  man  is  tempted  when  he  is  drawn 


Universal  Salvation.  95 

away  of  his  own  lust "  —  not  the  devil's.  And  doubt- 
less, some  of  the  imperfections  of  earth  will  adhere  to 
all,  more  or  less,  when  they  change  worlds.  Neither 
being  buried  in  water,  or  in  the  grave,  sanctifies  the  soul. 
It  is  the  grace  of  God  that  redeems,  now  and  forever. 

And  right  here  my  earnest  friend  is  puzzled.  He 
cannot  understand  how  a  person  dying  unsanctified  can 
be  saved.  He  really  does  not  seem  to  know  much  about 
salvation.  He  is  looking  for  salvation  from  an  outw^ard 
hell,  and  from  an  outward  devil;  and  he  cannot  com- 
prehend how  a  person  after  being  pitched  into  hell,  and 
gobbled  up  by  the  devil,  can  get  out  of  that  place,  or 
his  clutches.  It  would  likely  be  a  difficult  matter,  if  his 
Satanic  majesty  is  as  good  a  jailor  as  is  represented.  But 
this  is  all  wrong.  We  make  our  own  devils,  our  own 
hells,  and  salvation  is  from  those  inward  evils,  and  God 
has  given  us  ability  and  grace  to  make  our  salvation 
sure.  Now,  suppose  a  man  leaves  this  world  sinful,  as 
all  do  more  or  less,  why  cannot  he  be  enlightened  by 
divine  wisdom,  and  sanctified  by  divine  grace.'*  He  will 
be  the  same  man  he  was  before  his  body  was  dropped 
in  the  grave.  He  will  still  be  in  the  image  of  God,  and 
a  child  of  God.  As  he  will  have  intellect,  what  will 
prevent  him  from  believing  in  God,  believing  in  Jesus  .^ 
and  as  he  will  possess  moral  qualities,  what  will  prevent 
his  loving  and  obeying  the  truth  ?  Saul,  on  the  road  to 
Damascus,  with  blood  on  his  hands,  and  hate  in  his  soul, 
was  converted  instantly  by  one  glimpse  of  the  risen 
Jesus,  and  one  word  from  his  lips.  And  will  not  all  the 
glory  of  the  upper  world  redeem  a  soul .''  What  a  philo- 
sophy and  theology  that  must  be  that  says  nay !  The 
truth  is,  according  to  the  popular  theology,  we  shall  be 
shipped  directly  to  hell,  and  given  over  instantly  to  the 


96  07-al  Discussion. 

devil,  for  fear,  it  would  seem,  that  the  realities  of  heaven 
might  make  a  good  impression.  I  cannot  see,  but 
regeneration  will  be  effected  infinitely  easier  on  the 
golden  shore  than  in  this  world,  if  opportunity  is  given. 
Here  we  are  mortal,  there  immortal;  here  chained  to 
bodily  appetites  and  passions,  there  freed  from  them; 
here  there  are  not  only  temptations  within,  but  without, 
there  we  shall  be  removed  from  them ;  here  we  are  in 
the  material  world,  there  in  the  spirit-world;  here  we 
stand  near  the  grave,  there  nearer  God's  throne.  With 
all  these  advantages  how  will  it  happen  that  not  a  man 
will  become  better  in  the  spirit-world  .'*  I  want  to  know 
why  this  will  be  so.  The  laboring  oar  here  is  with  my 
friend.  All  have  the  grace  and  ability  to  walk  in  wis-  • 
dom's  ways  in  this  world.  God  now  invites,  commands, 
entreats,  all  to  be  wise  unto  salvation,  and  why  is  all 
this  reversed  as  soon  as  we  enter  the  land  of  Immortality.^ 
Let  him  give  the  reason  for  it.  Let  him  prove  it  is  so. 
God  invites  all,  till  they  draw  their  last  breath,  to  come. 
This  he  admits.  And  why,  instantly  after,  is  the  invita- 
tion all  turned  to  curses .''  I  demand  the  evidence  of  this, 
and  the  reason  for  so  sudden  a  change.  If  this  was  the 
first  time  this  doctrine  was  proclaimed,  the  people  would 
be  struck  dumb.  But  they  have  heard  it  preached  so 
long  they  do  not  generally  see  its  inconsistencies,  injust- 
ice and  cruelty.  But,  thank  God,  the  Christian  world 
is  pondering  this  subject,  and  a  brighter  day  is  dawning. 
But  then,  Mr.  S.  thinks,  the  will  of  man  stands,  like 
a  hydra-headed  monster,  ,in  the  way  of  God's  purposes. 
In  fact,  he  makes  out  that  man's  will  is  all-powerful, 
entirely  uncontrollable;  that  God,  Jesus,  angels,  are  all 
defeated,  humbled  and  crushed — their  purposes  are — by 
the  will  of  a  worm  of  the  dust !     The  truth  is,  the  will 


Universal  Salvatiojt.  97 

of  man  is  easily  influenced  by  a  skillful  hand.  What  an 
influence  men  have  over  men.  How  they  control  each 
others'  vs^ill.  How  parents  affect  their  children,  children 
parents.  What  an  influence  a  piece  of  music,  well 
rendered,  has  on  a  promiscuous  assembly.  It  afiects  all 
present.  How  quick  and  easy  was  wicked  Saul's  will 
subdued,  when  Jesus  said  to  him,  "  Why  persecutest 
thou  me.'"'  What  an  influence  Plato,  Mahomet,  the 
Pope,  Confucius,  have  had  in  the  world,  and  are  still 
having.  What  an  influence  Josephine  had  over  the  will 
of  the  conqueror  of  Ein'ope.  Reason,  love,  mercy,  and 
justice,  when  properly  directed,  will  subdue  the  most 
obstinate  will.     Here  is  a  case: 

A  fev^''  years  since, two  pirates  were  sentenced  in  Bos- 
ton to  be  hung.  Rev.  Joseph  Tuckerman  was  present 
when  the  jury  brought  in  their  verdict  of  guilty,  and  he 
says  one  of  them  broke  out  in  a  most  violent  strain  of 
horrid  and  blasphemous  cursing.  Tiiis  minister  of  Christ 
followed  the  wretched  man  to  his  cell,  went  in  with 
h).n,  requested  the  jailor  to  turn  the  key  upon  them,  and 
call  for  him  in  an  hour.  He  spent  an  hour  in  kind  con- 
versation and  prayer  with  the  felon,  but  to  no  visible 
eftect.  He  seemed  as  impervious  to  moral  influence  as 
a  stone.  My  friend  would  say,  "  He  has  sinned  away 
the  day  of  grace,"  his  "  will-power  is  entirely  destroyed," 
and  "  God  cannot  and  will  not  save  him."  Only  see 
how  Mr.  S.  errs. 

The  good  man  spent  an  hour  with  his  de^oraved  pupil 
the  next  day.  This  visit  terminated  like  the  first,  and 
when  about  to  retire,  Tuckerman  said  to  the  pirate,  "  / 
will  call  and  see  you  again  to-morrow."  '•'•  I  care  nothing 
about  it ;  all  I  want  is  to  go  to  hell,  where  it  is  hot 
Oi\   the  next  day's  visit,  when  this  true  Christian  was 

9 


98  Oral  Discussion. 

engaged  in  prayer,  the  jDirate  responded  Amen.  The 
ice  was  broken.  His  will  was  giving  way.  On  the 
next  visit,  when  his  friend  knelt  in  prayer,  the  pirate 
dropped  on  his  knees  with  him.  He  had  uttered  but 
few  words,  when  the  lost  wretch  broke  out  in  an  impas- 
sioned strain  of  earnest  supplication  and  entreaty  to  the 
Father  of  mercies.  "•  1  never,"  says  Tuckerman,  "  had 
witnessed  such  a  case  of  child-like,  heart-broken  peni- 
tence. He  seemed  a  little  child.  His  heart  was  all 
broken  to  pieces;  and  my  own  heart  came  nigh  break- 
ing from  the  force  of  my  sympathy  in  the  scene.  And," 
continues  he,  "  v/hat  effected  this  was  the  discovery,  on 
the  part  of  the  poor  lost  wretch,  of  a  Father  in  God. 
I  tried  no  other  means,  I  labored  to  convince  him  that 
he  had  a  Father  in  heaven  who  loved  him;  that 
there  was  goodness  on  the  throne  of  eternity.  At  the 
moment  this  conviction  reached  his  understanding,  it 
bi-oke  his  heart.  And  if  all  men,"  he  adds,  "  were 
brought  to  really  see  this  single  truth,  God  is  the  Father 
of  all^  I  will  answer  for  it,  that  their  conduct  toward 
each  other  would  be  that  of  brethren." 

That  man's  faith  in  hell  did  him  no  good;  but  the 
moment  he  saw  God  as  his  loving  Father  his  stubborn 
will  was  subdued.  That  knowledge  will  have  the  same 
effect  on  every  man,  let  him  be  in  this  world  or  the  im- 
mortal world.  My  friend  has  talked  about  being  forced 
into  heaven.  In  the  proper  sense  sinners  will  be  forced 
into  the  ways  of  life — forced  as  that  pirate  was.  "'I 
WILL,"  saith  the  Lord,  ''put  my  laws  into  their  minds, 
and  write  them  on  their  hearts,  and  I  will  be  to  them 
a  God,  and  they  shall  be  to  me  a  people.  And  they 
SHALL  not  teach  every  man  his  neighbor,  and  every 
man   his   brother,   saying,    '  know   the   Lord ; '    for   all 


Universal  Salvation.  99 

SHALL  know  me  from  the  least  to  the  greatest."  Heh. 
viii.  10,  ri.  "For  as  the  rain  cometh  down  and  the 
snow  from  heaven,  and  returneth  not  thither,  but 
watcreth  the  earth,  and  maketh  it  bring  forth  and  bud, 
that  it  may  give  seed  to  the  sower,  and  bread  to  the 
eater;  so  shall  my  woixl  be  that  goeth  forth  out  of  my 
mouth :  it  shall  not  return  unto  me  void ;  it  shall  ac- 
complish that  which  I  please,  and  it  shall  prosper  in 
the  thing  whereto  I  sent  it.  For  ye  shall  go  out  with 
joy,  and  be  led  forth  with  peace;  the  mountains  and 
the  hills  shall  break  forth  before  you  into  singing,  and 
all  the  trees  of  the  field  shall  clap  their  hands.  Instead 
of  the  thorn  shall  come  up  the  fir-tree,  and  instead  of 
the  brier  shall  come  up  the  myrtle-tree ;  and  it  shall 
be  to  the  Lord  for  a  name,  and  an  everlasting  sign,  that 
shall  not  be  cut  off."  Isa.  Iv.  10-13.  This  was  God's 
fur  pose;  and  if  language  has  any  meaning,  that  pur- 
pose is  to  be  executed.  That  is  sure.  But  no  comj^ul- 
sion,  as  Mr.  S.  uses  the  word,  of  the  will  of  man  is 
implied.  Jesus  did  not  force  Peter  to  repent,  nor 
Thomas  to  believe,  nor  Saul  to  become  a  member  of  his 
kingdom,  and  an  apostle  of  the  truth.  There  was  no 
coercion  in  those  cases ;  neither  is  there  in  the  salvation 
of  any,  and  there  never  will  be.  He  says,  I  must  prove 
that  man  will  eternally  have  the  power  to  will  to  serve 
God.  I  have  proved  that  over  and  over  again,  and  that 
finally  the  will  of  God  will  be  the  will  of  all.  But  let 
him  show,  if  he  can,  that  the  ability  to  will  to  do  the 
will  of  God  will  be  destroyed.  He  will  have  to  have  a 
new  revelation  before  he  can  do  that;  and  that,  I  am 
sure,  would  not  come  from  heaven.  According  to  the 
gentleman,  God  will  destroy  the  will  in  millions  to  do 
right,  and  then,  because  they  will  not  do  what  they  can- 


J 


lOo  Oral  Discussion. 

not  do,  he  will  damn  them  eternally!  He  does  not  say 
this,  of  course,  in  so  many  words,  but  that  is  what  his 
reasoning  amounts  to. 

My  friend  asks,  "  Does  God  compel  any  to  sufler  the 
pains  of  hell  during-  this  life  ?  "  He  compels  all  who  sin 
to  suffer,  and  he  always  will.  But  the  sinner  here  has 
the  ability  to  reform,  and  thereby  be  delivered  from  the 
pains  of  hell.  But  in  the  other  world  Mr.  S.  says  he 
will  have  no  such  ability,  and  so  be  damned  eternally 
for  not  doing  what  he  was  not  allowed  to  do !  The 
good  Lord,  he  thinks,  will  make  infernal  machines  of 
nearly  all  his  offspring  —  force  them  to  be  devils 
forever. 

He  intimates  that  I  teach  immoralities.  Let  him 
name  one.  I  challenge  him  to  name  one.  I  shall  be 
ready  for  him  when  he  enters  on  that  field.  Do  you 
hear  that,  Mr.  Sweeney.^ 

"  At  hand,"  "  quickly,"  he  will  have  it,  means  several 
thousand  years.  When  Jesus  said,  "  Agree  with  thine 
adversary  quickly"  he  meant,  wait  several  thousand 
years — did  he.^  When  the  angel  at  the  tomb  of  Jesus 
told  Mary  to  go  quickly  and  tell  his  disciples  that  the 
Lord  was  risen,  he  meant  any  time  within  ten  thousand 
years  would  do — did  he .'  When  Jesus  said,  "  My  time  is 
at  hand"  " the  summer  is  at  hand"  " the  kingdom  of 
God  is  at  hand"  "  the  passover  was  at  hand"  he  meant 
several  thousand  years — did  he.''  He  says  that  '■'■  taku 
rendereei  quickly,  ordinarily  means  quickly."  It  ahvays 
means  that  in  the  New  Testament,  as  I  showed  in  my 
last  speech.  Again  he  says,  '■'•  Engus  rendered  at  hand, 
generally  means  nigh."  It  always  means  nigh,  as  I 
have  proved.  He  inquires,  ••'  Has  the  passage  been  ful- 
filled.?"    If  Christ  told  the  truth,  it  has.     He  continues, 


Universal  Salvation.  loi 

"  Has  the  proclamation,  '  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  he 
filthy  still,'  gone  forth  ?"  No  doubt  of  it,  as  Jesus  was 
a  true  prophet.  He  again  asks,  "  Was  it  ever  revoked  ?" 
Not  that  I  know  of.  One  more  of  his  wise  questions : 
"If  it  is  not  revoked,  why  not  say,  'Be  filthy  still' 
instead  of  '  come '  ?"  Brother  Sweeney,  can  you  not 
understand  plain  English?  The  passage  does  not  say 
they  shall  be  filthy  one  day.  The  passage  has  reference 
to  the  rejection  of  the  Jewish  nation  as  the  peculiar  people 
of  God.  Hereafter,  special  favors  were  to  be  denied 
them ;  they  were  to  be  on  an  equality  with  other  nations, 
and  if  they  preferred  sin  to  holiness,  they  could  have  it. 
They  would  not  be  compelled  to  choose  the  wrong,  and 
hence  Christ  said  to  them,  "  Come." 

Jesus  did  not  tell  the  Jews  they  would  not  go  to  him 
because  they  would  die  in  their  sins.  That  is  an 
important  fact,  and  fatal  to  my  friend's  view  of  the 
passage.  He  inquires,  "Because  of  what  were  the  Jews 
not  to  go  to  Jesus  ?  "  For  the  same  reason  the  disciples 
could  not  go  to  him,  for  he  told  them,  as  well  as 
the  Jews,  they  could  not  go  to  him.  He  was  to  die 
shortly,  and  leave  them  in  this  world.  He  is  sure  the 
Jews  were  not  to  go  to  him  because  they  would  die  in 
their  sins.  But  let  it  be  remembered  that  Christ  does  not 
say  so,  does  not  intimate  such  a  thing.  He  told  them 
they  would  die  in  their  sins,  but  said  not  a  word  about 
the  result  of  so  dying.  Let  that  be  remembered.  I 
asked  my  friend,  in  my  last  speech,  if  he  believed  that 
none  would  be  saved  who  die  sinful,  but  he  did  not 
answer.  He  can  answer  the  question  now  if  he  pleases, 
or  in  his  next  speech.  I  want  an  answer,  yes  or  no,  and 
must  have  one.  But  afterwards,  Christ  told  both 
parties  they  would  finally  go  to  him.     He  stated  distinctl}'- 


f03  Oral  Discussion. 

/  to  the  Jews  that  the  time  would  come  when  they  would 
/'  say,  '''•Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord,"  "  I  ivill  draw  all  men  to  me"  and  through  Paul 
he  said,  "  For  of  him  and  through  him  and  to  him  are  all 
things,"  "yl// Zsvac/ shall  be  saved."  I  will  notice  this 
passage  again  when  the  gentleman  answers  tny  question. 

The  gentleman  will  have  it,  that  the  devil  of  the 
creeds  governs  a  large  part  of  mankind.  That  men  are 
sinful  is  ti'ue,  but  that  the  sovereignty  of  this  world  is 
divided  between  God  and  the  gentleman's  devil  is  a 
degrading  superstition.  We  have  only  his  word  for  it, 
and  he  will  please  excuse  us  if  we  do  not  subscribe  to 
such  a  monstrosity.  He  quotes  my  words,  "God 
governs  all  men,"  and  adds,  "what  a  government  it  is!" 
Did  an  Atheist  ever  utter  more  irreverent  words? 
Never,  never.  I  hope  he  will  see  the  folly  of  such  lan- 
guage, and  retract  it. 

In  my  argument  on  the  knowledge  of  God,  it  was 
stated  that  a  being  of  infinite  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Jus- 
tice, and  Mercy,  would  not  have  given  existence  to 
countless  millions,  knowing  that  existence  would  be 
an  endless  curse  to  them,  but  must  have  known  it  would 
be  a  blessing.  How  does  the  gentleman  meet  this 
formidable  argument  ?  "  There  is  suffering  in  this  world, 
and  God  knew  there  would  be,  and  therefore,  according 
to  Mr.  Manford,  it  is  not  an  evil."  Does  he  not  see  the 
sophistry  of  this  answer  ?  The  evils  of  this  world  have 
an  end^  according  to  my  view,  and  50  ai-e  reconcilable 
with  goodness;  but  the  evils  of  an  endless  hell  have  no 
end,  and  cannot  be  i-econcilcd  with  goodness.  Rev.  C.  H. 
Townsend,  an  Episcopal  minister,  sees  this,  and  hence 
writes, 

"  Give  evil  an  end — and  all  is  plain  ; 
Make  it  eternal — all  things  are  obscured!" 


Universal  Salvation.  103 

I  said,  "  Would  God  create  men  knowing  they  would 
be  eternally  lost?"  He  answers  by  asking,  "  VVliy  did 
God  create  men  knowing  they  would  suffer  a/f  a'!?" 
He  can  see  no  difference  between  suffering  a  fezv  days, 
and  suffering  to  all  eternity  I 

Nobody  questions  that  we  now  have  the  power  of 
choice,  and  we  are  happy  or  miserable  as  we  choose 
right  or  wrong.  Now,  give  the  inhabitants  of  hell  the 
power  to  choose  right  "or  wrong,  and  if  they  choose 
wrong  eternally,  let  them  suffer  eternally.  They  ought 
to.  But  he  tells  us  they  will  not  have  the  liberty  to 
choose  right.  No  such  privilege  will  be  granted  them. 
He  talks  about  reapers;  but  li  \\.\\ix%  knoT.vn  that  they 
n^t  only  killed  millions  of  men  and  women  every  har- 
vest, but  sent  them,  soul  and  body,  to  an  endless  hell, 
McCormick  would  not  have  made  the  money  he  has. 
Here  again  he  tries  to  be  blind  to  the  difference  between 
the  evils  of  a  few  days,  and  endless  evils.  I  do  not 
believe  Mr.  McCormick  would  make  or  sell  another 
reaper  if  he  knew  that  his  machines  sent  souls  to  an 
endless  hell.  He  would  be  a  monster  if  he  should 
persist  in  doing  what  he  knew  would  hurl  souls  to  end- 
less torments.  And  yet  God  daily  is  creating  Immortal 
souls,  knowing  all  the  time  that  eternal  destruction  will 
be  their  end — so  Mr.  S.  asserts. 

Another  argument  was  based  on  the  Fatherhood  of 
God.  God  is  the  Father  of  all,  now  and  forever,  and 
he  will  always  deal  with  all  fatherly,  kindly.  My  friend 
seems  to  be  in  a  fog-bank  here.  He  denies  that  God  is 
the  Father  of  all  men,  and  yet  contends  that  all  men  are 
the  offspring  of  God,  What  does  he  mean?  Is  here 
not  a  contradiction  ?  When  the  prophet  says,  "  We 
have  all  one  Father,"  my  friend  says  it  means  Father  in 


104  Oral  Discussion. 

the  sense  of  creation.  Yes,  creation  in  God's  image, 
and  hence  his  children.  But  this  only  means^tlie  Jews. 
Veiy  well.  But  those  Jews  were  "  treacherous,"  "  pro- 
fane," so  wicked  men  are  God's  children.  In  a  former 
speech  he  asserted,  that  the  saints  only  were  the  children 
of  God,  and  I  cited  this  passage  to  prove  that  sinners 
also  were,  and  it  proves  it. 

When  Paul  said  "  One  God,  the  Father  of  all,"  he 
meant,  the  gentleman  says,  that  God  was  only  the  Father 
of  believers.  But  some  of  the  believers  in  Paul's  day 
held  the  truth  in  unrighteousness,  and  if  God  was  their 
Father,  why  not  the  Father  of  other  sinners?  I  have 
shown,  time  and  again,  that  all  mankind  are  God's  child- 
ren because  they  are  made  in  his  image^  and  that  that  is 
an  eternal  relation,  but  that  all  are  not  God's  children 
morally.  The  gentleman  pays  no  attention  to  this  dis- 
tinction, although  it  is  a  very  important  distinction,  but 
talks  as  if  most  of  mankind  in  their  origin  are  the 
children  of  satan.  I  am  amazed  at  the  course  he  pur- 
sues. I  contend  that  no  one  is,  or  can  be,  saved  till  he 
is  morally  a  child  of  God,  till  he  is  in  God's  moral 
image.  Mr.  S.  knows  this;  and  why  then  all  this 
misrepresenting  ? 

As  my  allotted  time  has  nearly  expired  I  will  present 
some  additional  testimony  of  the  restitution  of  all  things. 

XII.  Man  is  in  the  Image  of  God.  This  is  one  of 
the  grandest  truths  of  revelation.  It  is  taught  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  in  the  New  Testament;  in  the 
Law,  and  in  the  Gospel;  by  Moses  and  by  Christ. 
"  And  God  said.  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image^  after 
our  likeness.  *  *  *  So  God  created  man  in  his  own 
ima^e.  in  the  iviarre  of  God  created  he  him."  Gen. 
i.  26,  27.     "In  the  day  tliat  God   created   man,  in   the 


Universal  Salvation.  105 

likeness  of  God  made  he  him."  Gen.  v.  i.  "Whoso 
sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall  his  blood  be  shed : 
for  in  the  image  of  God  made  he  man."  Gen.  ix.  6. 
It  is  an  error  of  the  creeds,  that  man  has  lost  the  divine 
image  in  which  he  was  created,  and  is  noiv  created  in 
the  image  of  satan.  If  this  is  so,  the  devil  must  now 
be  the  creator  of  mankind,  for  surely  the  all-wise,  and 
all-good  God  would  not  make  beings  in  the  image  of 
the  foe  of  God  and  man.  It  seems  that  when  the  New 
Testament  was  being  written,  man  was  still  created  in 
the  image  of  God.  The  apostle  James  says,  "There- 
with bless  we  God,  even  the  Father;  and  therewith 
curse  we  men,  which  are  made  after  the  similitude  of 
God."  Jas.  iii.  9.  And  the  apostle  Paul  uses  even 
stronger  language,  "  For  a  man  indeed  ought  not  to  cover 
his  head,  forasmuch  as  he  is  the  image  and  glory  of 
God."  I  Cor.  xi.  7.  Eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  then, 
God,  not  the  devil,  was  the  creator  of  man;  and  he  was 
made  in  his  image  and  glory,  not  in  the  image  of  satan. 
It  is  not  meant  that  man  physically  is  in  the  image  of 
God.  God  is  a  spirit,  and  man  is  a  spirit.  In  that 
respect  he  is  in  the  image  and  glory  of  God.  The  spirit 
is  the  real  man.  This  body  is  in  the  image  of  the  earth, 
and  is  earthy,  but  the  spirit  is  in  the  image  of  God,  and 
is  heavenly.  For  this  reason  men  are  said  to  be  children 
of  God,  and  he  their  Father.  They  are  his  offspring, 
and  partake  of  his  nature.  It  is  true,  that  tnorally  the 
wicked  are  not  in  the  image  of  God,  and  so  are  not 
characteristically  his  children.  We  must  be  careful  to 
make  the  proper  distinction  between  our  spiritual  na- 
ture, as  God  creates  us,  and  our  moral  character,  which 
is  our  own  making.  We  are  now,  and  ever  shall  be,  as 
the  Creator  formed  us — in  his  image  and  glory — and  so 


106  Oral  Discussion. 

are  liis  children ;  but  all  of  us  are  not  morally  in  God's 
image,  not  characteristically  his  children. 

••  None  are  wholly  God-forsaken, 
All  his  sacred  image  bear  ; 
None  so  lost  but  should  awaken 
In  our  hearts  a  brother's  care." 

What  will  God  do  with  his  images?  Annihilate 
them  }  Put  them  into  hell  .'*  Shut  them  up  with  devils .? 
Damn  them  eternally.''  As  the  apostle  Paul  would  say, 
"•  God  forbid  !  "  How  dare  we  charge  our  heavenly 
Father  with  doing  so  dreadful  a  thing!  He  has  not  built 
a  hell  on  purpose  to  fill  it  with  his  own  images.  He  has 
not  made  a  devil  on  purpose  to  degrade,  debase  and  tor- 
ment his  own  images  eternally.  The  reverse  of  this  is  the 
truth.  Man  was  made  in  the  image  and  glory  of  God 
for  a  wise  and  holy  purpose.  He  may  abuse  his  noble 
nature,  may  sink  deep  in  the  mire  of  sin  and  corruption, 
but  God's  image  is  still  there;  as  the  diamond,  notwith- 
standing it  is  sunk  in  the  cesspool,  is  a  diamond  still. 
Take  it  from  the  pit,  remove  its  rough  exterior,  and  it  is 
a  thing  of  beauty.  So,  raise  man  from  his  degradation, 
purify  him  by  the  word  of  truth,  and  the  divine  image 
is  seen  in  all  its  glory.  I  will  close  this  argument  in  the 
sublime  words  of  Sir  Humphrey  Davy,  written  more 
than  one  hundi^ed  years  ago.  Speaking  of  man  being 
in  the  image  of  God,  he  says, 

"  A  sacred  spark,  created  by  His  breath, 

The  immortal  mind  of  man  His  image  bears; 
A  spirit  living  midst  the  forms  of  death, 

Oppressed,  but  not  subdued,  by  mortal  cares. 
A  germ,  preparing  in  the  winter's  frost 

To  rise,  and  bud  and  blossom  in  the  spring ; 
An  unfledged  eagle,  by  the  tempest  tossed, 

Unconscious  of  its  future  strength  of  wing ; 


Universal  Salvation. 


107 


The  child  of  trial,  to  mortality 

And  all  its  changeful  influences  given ; 
On  the  green  earth  decreed  to  move  and  die ; 

And  yet,  by  such  a  fate,  prepared  for  heaven." 

XIII.  All  shall  p-aise  God.  "  All  thy  works  shall 
praise  thee,  O  Lord."  Ps.  cxiv.  6.  If  all  God's  works 
shall  praise  him,  then  all  mankind  will  praise  him.  But 
what  does  praising  God  mean?  Would  the  impreca- 
tions, blasphemies,  groans,  and  shrieks  of  damned 
spirits  be  praising  God  ?  Mr.  Sweeney  seems  to  think 
that  is  the  kind  of  "  praise "  millions  will  be  forced  to 
render  forever.  But  he  is  surely  mistaken.  We  praise 
God  in  our  bodies  and  our  souls  as  we  make  a  proper 
use  of  the  faculties  of  our  nature — not  when  we  abuse 
and  debase  ourselves.  Children  praise  their  earthly 
parents  if  they  are  wise  and  virtuous;  and  we  praise 
our  Heavenly  Parent  when  we  are  faithful  children. 
The  promise  is,  that  finally  all  shall  praise  him,  shall 
go  and  worship  before  him  and  glorify  his  name. 

XIV.  God  is  the  Owner  of  all  mankind.  This  is 
taught,  directly  or  indirectly,  on  most  every  page  of  the 
inspired  volume.  "  Behold,  saith  the  Lord,  all  souls 
ARE  mine;  as  the  soul  of  the  father,  so  also,  the  soul 
of  the  son  is  mine."  Eze.  xviii.  4.  This  is  clear,  distinct, 
emphatic.  All  mankind  belong  to  God.  They  are  his 
property,  and  are  his  most  precious  possessions.  Now 
what  will  God  do  with  his  owji?  Will  he  protect 
or  abandon  his  own  ?  Will  he  purify  or  debauch 
his  ovjn  ?  Will  he  save  or  endlessly  damn  his 
oxvn  ?  A  christian  can  give  but  one  answer  to 
those  questions,  and  that  is,  that  God  will  protect, 
purify,  save  his  own,  made  in  his  own  image.  [  Time 
expired. 


loS  Oral  Discussion. 

[mr.  Sweeney's  fourth  reply.] 

My  opponent  does  not  mean,  he  says,  "  to  speak 
lightly  of  endless  hell ;  "  means  not  to  ridicule  the  sub- 
ject; means  to  make  no  extravagant  and  distorted 
statement  of  the  subject;  means  no  misrepresentation 
of  the  teaching  of  his  opponents  as  to  the  character  of 
God;  but  is  only  "grieved  at  heart  to  think  that  so  many 
good  men  and  women  think  so  wickedly  of  the  God  of 
heaven;"  and  therefore  he  "  speaks  of  hell-torments  in 
pretty  plain  English."  He  does  not  mean  to  "  white- 
wash hell  inside  or  outside,"  "  to  mask  or  hide  its  devils 
in  the  dark,"  to  "  smother  its  fires,  or  scent  its  brim- 
stone with  '  balm  of  a  thousand  flowers ' ; "  but  he 
does  mean  "  to  awaken  people  to  the  horrors  of  their 
creed."  Scoffing  at  "hell;"  ridiculing  the  idea  of 
"  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels," 
— as  if  there  were  in  reality  any  devil  and  his  angels — 
burlesquing  the  notion  of  "  brimstone," — as  if  such  a 
word  were  used  in  the  Bible  in  connection  with  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked ;  "  awakening  people  to  the 
horrors  of  their  creed," — as  if  any,  even  civilized,  man 
would  think  of  saying,  "  knowing  the  terrors  of  the 
Lord,  we  persuade  men,"  or,  "  it  is  a  fearful  thing  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  God,"  or,  "  our  God  is  a  consum- 
ing fire;"  how  the  gentleman  reminds  us  of  Jesus  and 
all  the  apostles !  Let  him  be  as  good  as  his  word.  Let 
him  not  "whitewash  hell  inside  or  outside;"  not 
"smother  its  fires;"  not  "scent  its  brijnstone;"  not 
"  mask  or  hide  its  devils;  "  but  speak  of  the  punishment 
of  the  wicked  in  Bible  language,  and  we  shall  have  a 
profitable  debate.  I  will  promise  him,  if  he  will  do  all 
this,  that  I  will  not  use  one  word  or  phrase  descriptive 


Universal  Salvation.  109 

of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  that  I  cannot  find  so 
used  in  the  Bible.  Will  this  aflord  the  gentleman — so 
grieved  at  his  heart  "  to  think  that  so  many  good  men 
and  women  think  so  wickedly  of  the  God  of  heaven  " — 
any  relief?  Then  let  us  speak  of  this  subject  in  Bible 
language,  and  confine  ourselves  to  the  real  issue,  which 
is  as  to  the  eternity  of  punishment.  We  should, 
however,  bear  in  mind  that  we  are  still  discussing,  or 
should  be  discussing,  the  first  proposition.  What  do  I 
care  for  the  language  of  the  "creeds"!  What  care  I 
for  the  extravagant  and  even  silly  language  that  some 
men,  believing  in  "  everlasting  punishment,"  have  used 
concerning  it !  Am  I  here  to  defend  either  the  one  or 
the  other?  I  think  not.  I  am  sorry  to  say,  that  extrav- 
agantly and  foolishly  as  some  of  the  advocates  of  the 
doctrine  of  "everlasting  punishment"  have  expressed 
themselves,  even  their  language  will  not  answer  the  pur- 
pose of  my  opponent.  He  puts  his  wits  to  torture  to 
construct  still  more  ridiculous  and  incongruous  phrase- 
ology, by  which  to  present  the  views  of  his  opponents 
in  the  most  hideous  and  distorted  manner  possible. 
This  I  have  found  with  most  Universalists  to  be  more 
than  half  the  battle.  And  he  thinks  I  am  "  uneasy " 
when  he  "  talks  thus  about  hell."  "Uneasy,"  forsooth! 
"  Uneasy  "  about  what  ?  Will  he  be  so  obliging  as  to 
tell  us  what  he  supposes  I  am  uneasy  about  when  he 
is  having  a  little  sport  about  hell  ?  Does  he  think  he  is 
terrifying  me?     I  am  not  that  man. 

The  "  hosts "  of  my  brethren  who  advocate  annihila- 
tion the  gentleman  has  about  frittered  away.  He 
says  now  that  "  some "  of  them  advocate  that  notion, 
and  that  I  "  know  that  to  be  correct."  And  now,  as  he 
seems   determined   to   run    this   little   irrelevant  matter 


no  Oral  Discussion. 

through  our  discussion,  I  have  a  proposition  to  make  to 
him :  For  every  man  he  can  find  belonging  to  the  church 
of  wliich  I  am  a  member  and  preacliing  annihilation 
views,  I  will  find  him  a  Universalist  preaching  deism. 
Let  him  count  out  his  "  hosts," 

Speaking  of  infants  again,  the  gentleman  says,  "  They 
are  born  sinful,  live  sinful,  die  sinful,  as  Mr.  Campbell 
teaches^  How  Mr.  Campbell's  language  fluctuates  on 
my  opponent's  Ups!  It's  wonderful!  Mr.  Campbell 
never  said  what  he  represents  him  as  saying.  Mr.  C. 
only  said,  "  we  all  inherit  a  fallen,  consequently  a  sinful 
nature" — that  we  are  "  condemned  to  natural  death, 
and  greatly  fallen  and  depraved  in  our  whole  constitu- 
tion." Does  Mr.  Manford  mean  no  more  by  the  woixl 
"sinful"  in  his  proposition  than  this.''  Does  he  mean 
to  affirm  no  more  than  that  all  who  leave  this  world  sin- 
ful merely  in  the  sense  of  having  a  depraved  natui"e,  a 
weak  and  imperfect  constitution,  and  hence  condemned 
to  natural  death,  will  finally  be  saved.?  He  means 
almost  infinitely  more  than  this.  He  means  that  all  who 
leave  this  world  guilty  of  willful  and  unrepented  trans- 
gressions of  God's  law,  persisted  in  during  life,  and 
hence  in  irreconciliation  and  rebellion  against  God — 
though  they  may  curse  God  and  die — will  finally  be 
reconciled  to  God  and  saved.  And  in  his  attempt  to 
cover  the  enormity  of  this  affirmation,  he  tells  you,  with 
much  seeming  seriousness,  that  "  Mr.  Campbell  and 
Mr.  Sweeney  together  send  all  infixnts  to  hell."  Does 
he  really  believe  this.?  Did  Mr.  Campbell  teach  that  by 
nature  we  ai^e  more  than  "  condemned  to  natural 
death  "  .?  Of  course  not.  I  think  Mr.  Campbell  might 
better  have  used  some  other  word  instead  of  "  sinful ;  " 
but  he  did  not  mean  by  sinful  what  we  ordinarily  mean. 


Universal  Salvation.  n  i 

He  did  not  mean,  as  every  one  who  has  read  the 
article  from  which  this  clause  is  quoted  knows,  to  teach 
that  we  are  born  giiilty  of  sin.  For  no  man  did  ever 
more  unmistakably  repudiate  a  dogma  than  Mr.  Camp- 
bell did  the  dogma  of  infant  regeneration,  and  the  necessity 
for  it.  I  am  understood,  of  course,  to  speak  of  regene- 
ration in  a  moral  sense.  Infants  do  not  leave  this  world 
in  irreconciliation^  or  morally  corrupt,  and  hence  guilty 
of  sin;  and  hence  they  are  not  included  in  the  gentle- 
man's proposition,  much  as  he  would  like  to  have  them 
there.  And  his  effort  to  bring  them  in  shows,  to  my 
satisfaction,  that  he  feels  that  the  enormity  of  his  j^ropo- 
sition  is  ciying  out  for  some  mitigation. 

I  saw  early  in  our  discussion  that  my  opponent  was 
trying  to  confound  the  weaknesses  and  imperfections 
of  our  nature  with  positive  sinfulness  and  guilt,  and  de- 
liverance from  these  weaknesses  and  imperfections  with 
salvatiofi  from  sin  and  guilt  ;  and,  therefore,  I  asked 
him  what  he  meant  by  salvation.  And  his  answer  is 
precisely  what  I  expected  to  get,  if  I  was  to  have  any. 
He  says,  and  repeats,  that  "  salvation  is  deliverance  from 
the  imperfections  of  earth."  The  confounding  of  nat- 
ural law  with  ethical  law,  and  constitutional  imperfec- 
tion with  moral  transgression,  is  a  mode  of  thought  akin 
to  Pantheism,  and  one  which  I  think  Christianity 
regards  with  intense  antipathy.  Innocent  infirmity  and 
iniquity  belong  in  very  different  categories.  If  sin  is 
not  the  transgression  of,  or  voluntary  apostasy  from, 
obedience  to  a  law  which  commands  but  constrains  not, 
then  the  very  foundation  of  the  Christian  system  is 
gone.  Who  is  "  delivered  from  the  imperfections  of 
earth  " .''  Nobody,  in  this  world.  Then  who,  according 
to  this  definition  of  salvation,  is  saved }     Who  ever  has 


112  Oral   Disctission. 

been  saved  in  this  world  ?  Nobody.  But  is  this  apos- 
tolic? Did  not  the  apostles  represent  all  Christians  as 
being  saved  in  this  world?  Certainly.  As  I  expected 
he  would,  the  gentleman  makes  death  infinitely  a  greater 
Savior  than  Jesus!  Death,  with  him,  is  an  Almighty 
Savior!  It  lifts  the  veil,  and  at  once  lets  all  "the  glory 
of  the  upper  world "  in  upon  a  sinner,  who  has  long 
resisted  all  the  love  of  Jesus,  and  he  is  "  converted  in- 
stantly" by  one  "glimpse"  of  heaven!  Why,  if  he 
is  right,  did  Jesus  come  into  this  world  to  save  sinners? 
And  then,  what  is  there  in  the  cross  or  the  blood  of 
Christ,  to  save  men,  like  the  Almightiness  of  death,  that 
at  once  ushers  the  vilest  sinner  directly  into  the  effulgence 
of  "  the  upper  world,"  where  all  sins  "  instantly  "  dis- 
appear ! !  Why  does  not  God  save  us  all  as  he  did  the 
Egyptians,  and  the  Sodomites,  and  the  wicked  Jews 
when  he  destroyed  their  city,  by  sending  glorious  death 
to  sweep  us  at  once  into  "  the  glory  of  the  upper  world  "  ? 
Perhaps,  after  all,  Judas  understood  the  plan  of  salvation 
better  than  the  men  of  his  time,  or  most  men  of  our 
time.  When  his  soul  was  borne  down  by  guilt  till  he 
could  bear  it  no  longer,  and  not  feeling  disposed  to  wait 
to  be  relieved  by  the  slow  processes  of  the  Gospel  in  the 
outer  court,  he  concluded  to  leap  at  once  into  "  the  glory 
of  the  upper  world,"  and  be  converted  "  instantly  "  and 
sa\  ed  eternally !  Then  there  were  Ananias  and  Sapphira 
who  lied  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  a  sin  that  could  not  be  for- 
given "  in  the  Jewish  age  or  the  Christian  age,"  as  my 
friend  would  say ;  they  were  sent  off  to  the  glory  of  the 
upper  world  to  be  instantly  converted,  sanctified,  and 
glorified!  And  in  proof  of  this  doctrine  of  conversion 
and  salvation  by  death,  or  through  death,  we  are  referred 
to   the   case  of  Saul.     The  gentleman   thinks   he  vs^as 


Unive7'sal  Salvation. 


"3 


saved  "  instantly,"  and  "  by  one  glimpse  of  the  risen 
Jesus,  and  one  word  from  his  lips."  I  think,  however, 
that  he  would  do  well  to  re-examine  that  case,  de  novo. 
By  doing  so  carefully,  he  may  discover  that  Jesus  did 
not  appear  to  Saul  for  the  express  pui"pose  of  savi?zg 
him  by  his  glorious  pr-esence.,  and  "  one  word  from  his 
lips."  He  may  also  discover  that  Saul  was  not  saved 
instantly,  when  he  saw  the  Lord,  but  came  to  the  rc7nis- 
sion  of  sins  some  time  afterward,  and  by  willing  obedi- 
ence to  the  Gospel.  He  may  discover,  furthermore, 
that  Saul's  salvation  did  not  consist  in  "  deliverance  from 
the  imperfections  of  earth." 

So  the  gentleman  has  at  last  informed  us  where  all 
■who  leave  this  world  sinful  go  to.  They  "  drop  their 
bodies  in  the  grave"  and  go  immediately  into  "the  glory 
of  the  upper  world,"  where  they  are  "  converted  instant- 
ly," and  fashioned  like  unto  all  heavenly  beings!  Then 
why  did  he  set  out  so  cautiously,  saying,  "  I  do  not  affirm 
how  or  when  this  reconciliation  is  effected  — only  that 
all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will  finally  be  reconciled 
to  God  and  saved "  .'*  Why  did  he  not  at  once  relieve 
all  possible  suspense  by  telling  us  that  all  who  leave  this 
world  sinful  go  at  once  into  "  the  glory  of  the  upper 
world,"  where  all  their  sins  and  moral  pollution  are 
melted  away,  as  frosts  are  melted  before  the  rising  sun, 
only  a  little  more  "instantly".^  What  a  wonderful 
work  death  alone  accomplishes  for  the  sinner^  agreeably 
to  my  friend's  teaching!  It  makes  him  "immortal" — 
of  course  whether  he  has  sought  for  it  or  not — frees  him 
from  all  wrong  "appetites  and  passions;"  lifts  him 
entirely  above  "  all  inward  and  outward  temptations ; " 
and  brings  him  "near  God's  throne"!  And  no  marvel 
the  gentleman  thinks  that  "regeneration  will  be  effected 

lO 


114  Oral  Discussio7i. 

infinitely  easier  on  the  golden  shore  than  in  this  world  " ! 
"With  all  tiiese  advantages,"  as  my  friend  says,  how 
will  any  fail  of  reconciliation  and  salvation,  after  they 
get  into  heaven  ?  What  a  grand  place  heaven  must  be 
for  successful  missionary  work!  But  we  must  not  forget 
death;  for  it  almost  finishes  the  work  as  it  carries  the 
sinner  through  to  "  the  glory  of  the  upper  world."  It 
rids  him  of  all  hindrances.  Then  sinner,  take  courage. 
If  you  find  it  a  hard  matter  to  overcome  the  world,  the 
flesh  and  your  subjective  devil,  you  may  "knock  under" 
and  wait  for  death  to  usher  you  into  "  the  glory  of  the 
upper  world,"  where,  "with  all  its  advantages,"  your 
"  regeneration  will  be  effected  infinitely  easier  than  in 
this  world."  True,  you  may  "  die  in  your  sins,"  but 
whither  Jesus  has  gone  you  shall  go  immediately,  and  be 
instantly  saved  and  glorified  with  him !  How  the  gentle- 
man's doctrine  reminds  one  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus, 
and,  indeed,  of  almost  all  he  ever  read  in  the  Bible ! 

The  gentleman  says  "we  make  our  own  devils." 
Well,  did  Jesus  make  his  own  devil,  that  tempted  him 
in  the  wilderness.-* 

If  sinners  will  not  have  opportunity  to  be  reconciled 
and  saved  in  the  future  world,  the  gentleman  wants  to 
know  "  why  it  will  be  so."  He  thinks  the  "  laboring 
oar  is  with"  me,  here;  and  therefore  he  says,  "Let  him 
prove  it  will  be  so."  I  think,  however,  the  laboring  oar 
is  his.  In  fact,  I  know  it  is.  Let  him  prove  that  sin- 
ners will  have,  in  the  next  world,  the  opportunities  they 
slight  in  this.  He  must  do  this,  and  ?nore,  before  he 
can  claim,  with  any  show  of  reason,  to  have  made  out 
his  case.  He  must  show  not  only  that  sinners  who 
slight  all  opportunities  of  salvation  in  this  life  will  have 
those  opportunities  in  the  future  life,  but  that  they  all 


Universal  Salvation.  115 

"joill  certaijily  improve  them,  and  be  saved.  But  he  has 
no  sufficient  authority  for  asserting  either  the  one  or  the 
other.  God  has  revealed  nothing  to  us  concerning  recon- 
ciHation  in  the  future  world.  And  to  say  that  God  will 
offer  greater  motives  to  virtue  in  the  future  world  than 
he  has  offered  here,  is  to  impeach  both  his  divine  Wis- 
dom and  Goodness,  and  put  an  excuse  in  the  mouth  of 
sinners  for  their  disobedience.  The  man  who  deliber- 
ately rejects  Christ  is  gone — forever  gone,  when  he  passes 
into  the  future  world.  So  the  Bible  teaches,  or  it  teaches 
nothing. 

We  are  informed  that  according  to  my  teaching  the 
purposes  of  "  God,  Jesus,  angels,  are  all  defeated,  hum- 
bled, and  crushed,  by  the  will  of  a  wortn  of  the  dust" 

that   is,  the   "  Image  of  Gotl."     This  the  gentleman 

thinks  is  quite  shocking.  Well,  I  suppose  I  must  notice 
this  matter  of  the  "will"  of  man  and  "purpose"  of 
God  ao-ain.  I  will  submit  the  whole  matter  of  contro- 
versy in  a  trilemma.  It  is  true  either,  first.  That  God 
purposes  that  man  should  do  whatever  man  does  and  be 
whatever  he  is ;  or,  secondly.  That  God  purposes  that 
man  should  do  good  and  be  happy,  and  man  defeats 
that  purpose,  does  evil  and  is  unhappy;  or,  thirdly, 
That  God  has  no  purpose  concerning  man's  actions  and 
happiness  that  disregards  man's  will.  I  submit  this  as 
exhaustive.  Now,  which  horn  of  the  trilemma  will  my 
opponent  take?  Will  he,  with  Ballou,  take  the  first, 
and  make  God  the  author  of  w^hatever  man  does,  and 
the  cause  of  whatever  he  is;  and  then  deny  that  there  is 
any  "  real  evil  in  the  universe,"  rather  than  make  God 
its  cause?  Or,  will  he  take  the  second,  and  thus  allow 
that  the  purpose  of  God  is  defeated  "  by  a  worm  of  the 
dust".?     Or,  will  he  take  the  third,  and^  thus  allow  that 


Il6  Oral  Disczission. 

God  so  purposes  concerning  man's  actions  and  happiness 
as  that  his  purposes  to  some  extent  depend  upon  man's 
will  for  their  performance  ?  I  hope  the  gentleman  will 
select  his  position  and  let  us  hear  from  him  in  unequivo- 
cal terms.  My  position  is,  I  think,  unequivocal.  I 
want  it  tested  severelj-. 

It  is  true,  as  the  gentleman  said  and  argued  so  length- 
ily, that  man's  will  can  be  "  influenced ; "  but  can  it  be 
com  polled?  That's  the  question.  Can  God  himself 
will  for  man  and  yet  treat  him  as  having  a  will  of  his 
own  ?  We  cannot  argue  from  the  divine  attributes  that 
he  will  do  so,  even  in  order  to  man's  recovery  from  sin 
and  eternal  ruin ;  there  are  too  many  unknown  elements 
in  the  problem.  God  may  never  be  willing  to  dishonor 
his  own  image  in  breaking  down  the  freedom  of  the 
creature;  and  so  the  very  dignity  and  worth  of  man, 
about  which  my  friend  has  so  much  to  say,  may  stand 
in  the  way  of  his  recovery.  I  am  very  slow  to  accept 
conclusions  drawn  merely  from  what  are  called  the 
divine  attributes.  They  are  not  a  legitimate  subject  of 
human  reason.  We  must  know  all  the  premises  contain 
before  we  can  thence  draw  entirely  reliable  conclusions. 
What  I  have  said  on  this  point  applies  to  all  my  oppo- 
nent's arguments. 

That  was  a  sad  and  touching  story  we  heard  concern- 
ing the  "condemned  pirate."  I  was  nevertheless  a  little 
amused  at  its  abrupt,  not  to  say  farcical,  conclusion. 
Finally  "the  lost  wretch  broke  out  in  an  impassioned 
strain  of  earnest  supplication  and  entreaty  to  the  Father 
of  mercies" — for  what?  thought  I,  if  Universalism  be 
true.  Had  not  the  gentleman  come  so  near  shedding 
tears  over  the  story,  I  believe  I  should  press  that  question 
a  little  upon  him  yet. 


Universal  Salvation.  1 17 

My  wortliy  opponent  is  In  trouhlc  with  his  doctrine  of 
"force."  He  is  evidently  tired  of  the  old  Univcrsalibt 
doctrine,  that  all  God's  "shalls"  arc  absolutely  uncondi- 
tional ;  and  then,  again,  he  docs  not  get  on  very  well  with- 
out it.  He  oscillates.  Sometimes  he  seems  orthodox,  and 
at  other  times  heterodox  on  this  question.  And  I  am 
not  quite  certain  but  that  at  times  he  gets  a  little  out  of 
humor.  For  what  purpose .  did  he  cite  all  those  scrip- 
tures containing  the  words  "shall"  and  "will,"  empha- 
sizing those  words  so  heavily.''  Was  it  not  to  make  the 
impression  that  the  promises  with  which  they  were  con- 
nected, were  absolutely  unconditional,  and  the  commands 
were  absolute  decrees  to  which  all  will  be  compelled  to 
yield  obedience,  willing  or  unwilling.''  I  think  it  was. 
But  such  a  i:)OsItion  is  easily  shown  to  be  untenable. 
One  passage  of  scripture  is  sufficient  to  show  it.  Let  us 
read  Acts  ill.  23,  33 :  "  For  Moses  truly  said  unto  the 
fathers,  '  A  prophet  shall  the  Lord  your  God  raise  up 
unto  you  of  your  brethren  like  unto  me;  him  shall  ye 
hear  in  all  things  whatsoever  he  shall  sa}^  unto  you. 
And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  every  soul  which  will  not 
hear  that  prophet  shall  be  destroyed  from  among  the 
people.'"  Now,  in  the  first  verse  of  this  quotation  it  is 
said,  "  Him  5/^(2// ye  hear;"  from  which,  I  suppose,  the 
gentleman  would  argue  the  absolute  and  unavoidable 
certainty  that  every  soul  will  hear  that  prophet.  But 
that  this  would  be  fallacious  the  next  verse  shows  most 
conclusively.  "And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  every 
soul  which  xuill  not  hear  that  prophet  shall  be  destroyed." 
Thus  we  see  that  although  God  says  "him  sliall  ye 
hear,"  he  recognizes  the  fact  that  some  may  "  will  not " 
to  hear.  When,  therefore,  God  says,  "him  shall  yc 
hear,"   he  simply  reveals,  or  declares,  duty,  and  every 


ii8  Oral  Discussion. 

man  ought  to  do  it;  but  he  can  oppose  his  will  to  the 
will  of  God,  and  take  the  consequences.  And  this  is 
the  key  to  all  the  passages  he  quoted. 

My  friend  goes  back  to  Revelations.  And  there  is 
nothing  clearer  than  that  he  finds  "great  tribulation" 
there.  I  said  "  quickly  "  and  "  at  hand  "  do  not  indicate 
that  all  that  was  spoken  of  in  that  passage  was  to  be 
fulfilled  even  in  a  few  years.  I  say  so  still.  We  agree 
as  to  the  usual  meaning  of  the  words  rendered  "  quickly  " 
and  "at  hand."  But  all  our  words  indicating  divisions 
of  time  are  in  scripture  often  used  to  indicate  almost 
infinitely  more  than  they  usually  do ;  as,  for  instance, 
"  day,"  "  week,"  and  "year."  So  the  words  rendered 
" shortly,"  " quickly,"  and  "at  hand"  are  used.  Com- 
pared with  eternity  a  thing  may  be  said  to  be  "  at  hand," 
or  coming  "  quickly,"  though  it  may  be  hundreds  of 
years  in  the  future;  and  as  compared  with  a  man's  nat- 
ural lifetime,  a  long  way  off.  A  father  is  absent  from 
his  faiTiily  a  year,  and  it  is  called  a  long  time;  and  when 
eight  months  arc  to  pass  yet  before  his  return,  his  com- 
ing would  not  be  said  to  be  "  at  hand  ; "  but  when  that 
man's  whole  probable  lifetime  is  spoken  of,  as  it  stands 
to  eternity,  it  is  called  but  a  moment,  but  a  span,  and 
death,  which  is  in  all  probability  years  in  the  future, 
is  spoken  of  as  "at  hand,"  "at  the  door" — comes 
"  quickly."  My  friend  understands  this  matter,  and  so 
uses  words  every  day.  Indeed,  he  did  so  in  his  last 
speech,  and  I  noted  the  fact.  You  remember,  he  wanted 
to  know  if  I  could  "  see  no  difference  between  suffering 
a.  few  days^  and  suffering  to  all  eternity."  By  a  "few 
davs"  he  evidently  meant  a  lifetime;  and  why  did  he 
call  it  a  '■'•few  days"  P  Because  he  spoke  of  it  in  com- 
parison with  eternity.     Why,  in  the  very  first  verse  of 


Universal  Salvation.  119 

the  book  of  Revelation,  it  is  said  that  the  "  things " 
therein  spoken  of  "  must  shortly  come  to  pass."  But 
my  friend  himself  does  not  believe  they  have  all  come  to 
j^ass  yet.  He  puts  some  of  those  things  in  the  future 
which  eighteen  hundred  years  ago  it  was  said  "  must 
shortly  come  to  pass."  So,  he  "  will  have  to  revise  Web- 
ster's Dictionary."  But  we  are  told  that  the  passage  in 
controversy  has  "reference  to  the  rejaction  of  the  Jewish 
nation."  The  time  was  "  at  hand,"  was  coming  "  quickly," 
when  the  Jews  "  were  to  be  on  an  equality  with  other 
nations."  But  in  this  position  the  gentleman  is  unfortu- 
nate again.  For  the  Jews  were  already  "  on  an  equality 
with  other  nations."  Peter  had  said,  fifty  years  before, 
"  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in  every  nation^ 
he  that  fcareth  him  and  worketh  righteousness  is 
accepted  with  him."  Acts  x.  34,  35.  "  He  that  is 
filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still,"  means  "  the  rejection  of 
the  Jewish  nation"!  That  caps  the  climax!  Well,  I 
would  like  to  know,  if  there  is  one  of  all  the  "little 
unpleasantnesses"  of  the  Bible  that  does  not  "refer  to 
the  rejection  of  the  Jewish  nation,"  which  one  it  is. 
That  "rejection  of  the  Jewish  nation"  was  certainly, 
according  to  Universalism,  one  of  the  most  extensive 
and  most  everlasting  affliirs  in  the  history  of  the  world ! 

The  gentleman  says,  he  "  must  have  an  answer  to  his 
question,  whether  I  believe  any  will  be  saved  who  die 
sinful."  He  has  a  harder  question  than  that  before  him. 
He  affirms  that  "  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will 
finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved."  Let  him  prove 
that,  or,  if  he  thinks  he  can  do  it  better  piecemeal,  let. 
him  go  to  work  and  first  prove  that  some  who  die  sinful 
will  be  saved. 

We  are  told  that  the  Jews  who  died  in  their  sins  did 


I20  Oral  Discussion. 

go  to  heaven,  because  Jesus  told  them  they  should  not 
see  him  henceforth  till  they  should  say,  "•  Blessed  is  he 
that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  And  does  that 
prove  that  they  w^ere  saved?  Not  quite  satisfactorily. 
Then  the  gentleman  quotes,  "All  Israel  shall  be  saved." 
He  left  off  the  ''so."  Put  on  the  "so,"  Mr.  M.,  and 
read,  "  So  all  Israel  shall  be  saved."  Tell  us  whom  "  all 
Israel "  includes ;  and  how  all  Israel  shall  be  saved .'' 

But  Christ  will  save  those  Jews  whom  he  told  they 
should  die  in  their  sins,  and  whither  he  went  they  could 
not  go,  we  are  told,  because  Paul  said  "of  him,  and 
through  him,  and  to  him,  are  all  things."  But  if  that 
proves  universal  salvation,  it  proves  that  all  were  already 
saved  when  Paul  wrote  that  language;  for  he  said,  "of 
him,  and  through  him,  and  to  him,  are  [now]  all  things." 
This  is  the  wrong  witness,  evidently. 

When  the  gentleman  speaks  of  the  "devil"  as  he 
does,  why  does  he  say  "  the  devil  of  the  creeds^''  or  "  the 
gentle/nan's  devil.'*"  Is  it  to  hide  a  trifle  of  skepticism.'' 
I  have  spoken  of  the  devil,  and  always  do,  strictly  in 
scripture  style. 

The  worthy  gentleman  seems  to  think  me  as  "iri-ev- 
erent"  as  any  "atheist,"  because  I  will  not  allow  that 
God  is  all  in  all.  I  repeat  with  emphasis  all  I  said. 
Some  men  "  are  not  of  the  Father,"  but  are  of  "  their 
father,  the  devil,  and  his  will "  they  do. 

My  friend  admits  I  am  coiTcct  as  to  the  law  of  human 
happiness.  He  says,  "we  now  have  the  power  of 
choice,  and  are  happy  or  miserable  as  we  choose  the 
right  or  wrong."  Now,  this  lays  the  axe  to  the  root  of 
the  tree  of  his  argument,  as  he  calls  it,  drawn  from  what 
he  thinks  he  knows  of  the  "  knowledge  of  God."  Man's 
capability  of  happiness  involves  his  capability  of  unhap- 


Universal  Salvation,  12 1 

piness;  and  as  he  may  be  eternally  happy,  so  he  may 
also  be  eternally  unhappy.  This  Is  admitted.  But,  says 
the  gentleman,  "  allow  the  inhabitants  of  hell  the  power 
to  choose  right  or  wrong,  and  if  they  choose  wrong 
eternally,  let  them  suffer  eternally.  They  ought  to." 
This  gives  iip  Universalism,  as  taught  by  all  the  fathers ! 
But  as  my  friend  does  not  "subscribe"  to  what  any  of 
them  say,  I'll  take  him  alone.  Grant,  now,  for  the  sake 
of  argument,  what  is  both  unscriptural,  and  unreason- 
able, namely:  that  men  can  never  lose  this  power  of 
choice  —  that  their  moral  condition  will  never  become 
fixed — that  human  life  with  all  its  laws  and  conditions 
of  happiness  will  be  an  endless  cycle — then  can  it  be 
proved  that  men  who  will  not  in  this  world  certainly 
will  in  the  next  choose  and  do  the  right.?  Does  the 
Bible  say  so.''  If  so,  where.?  And  what  does  reason 
say.?  That  prolonged  indulgence  in  sin  increases  the 
probabilities  of  reform .?  I  think  not.  All  analogical 
reasoning  is  against  my  friend  here.  Golden  opportuni- 
ties slighted,  do  not  press  upon  us  etei-nally.  It  is  a 
significant  scripture  fact,  too,  that  the  "rich  man"  did 
not  seem  to  have  the  power  of  choice  after  he  left  this 
world. 

What  the  gentleman  had  to  say  about  McCormick's 
reapers  was  more  shrewd  than  pointed.  The  McCor- 
mick  reaper  does  not  propose  to  "  reap  life  everlasting." 
To  the  extent  that  anything  is  "  a  savor  of  life  unto  life  " 
it  may  be  a  "  savor  of  death  unto  death,"  but  no  farther. 
So  says  my  moral  philosophy. 

My  opponent  claims  that  I  misrepresent  his  argument 

drawn    from    the    "  Fatherhood    of   God,"  and    he    is 

"  amazed  at  the  coui-se  "  I  pursue.     I  am  sorry  I  cannot 

help  him  out  of  his  trouble.     If  he  would  receive  the 

II 


123  Of'al  Discussion. 

truth  I  could.  But  how  stands  the  "  argument "  on  the 
"  Fatherhood  of  God  "  ?  The  gentleman  makes  two 
admissions  that  knock  it  all  to  pi.  He  admits  that  "  all 
are  not  God's  children  morally"  and  that  "  no  one  is, 
or  can  be,  saved  till  he  is  morally  a  child  of  God." 
Then  all  are  not  saved  now,  because  all  are  not  God's 
children  morally.  Well,  has  he  proven  that  all  ever  will 
become  God's  children  in  a  moral  sense.?  If  so,  I  failed 
to  hear  him.  When  he  does  so — and  not  till  then — he 
may  begin  to  talk  about  his  "  argument  from  the  Father- 
hood of  God."  No  wonder  the  gentleman  is  "  amazed," 
and  frets  a  little  at  times!  He  makes  a  few  incoherent 
statements,  calls  them  an  argument,  and  when  they 
crumble  to  pieces  in  my  hands  at  the  slightest  touch, 
and  disappear, 

"  Like  the  baseless  fabric  of  a  dream," 

the  gentleman  stands  completely  "  amazed  "  ! 

XII.  "  Man  is  in  the  image  of  God,"  the  gentleman 
tells  us,  "  is  one  of  the  grandest  truths  of  revelation." 
Well,  it  is  a  grand  truth,  an  awfully  grand  truth,  I 
grant.  Now,  while  I  am  not  exactly  "  amazed,"  I  am 
a  little  astonished  that  the  gentleman  should  call  this  his 
'''' twelfth  argument."  Why,  has  he  not  had  more  or 
less  to  say  about  it  in  every  speech  he  has  made !  And 
have  I  not  once  or  twice  disposed  of  it,  to  his  utter 
amazement.'' 

But  after  saying  several  things,  true  in  the  main,  he 
asks,  "What  will  God  do  with  his  image?"  Well, 
what  does  "  God  do  with  his  image  "  nozv  ?  And  what 
docs  that  image  do  with  itself  ?  These  are  grave 
questions,  but  the  asking  of  no  one  of  them  proves  my 
friend's   proposition.     He   asks,  again,  "  Will  God  put 


Universal  Salvation. 


123 


them  into  hell  ?  "  Where  does  he  put  them  now  ?  And 
where  do  they  put  thetnselves  ?  The  gentleman  is  con- 
stantly trying  to  make  the  imjDression  upon  your  minds 
that  I  "  charge  our  heavenly  Father  with  so  dreadful  a 
thing  as  the  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked."  /  do 
no  suck  thmg.  Please  bear  that  in  mind.  I  do  not 
"  charge  our  heavenly  Fatlier "  with  even  the  punish- 
ment we  know  the  wicked  suffer  in  this  world,  as  Uni- 
versallstn  has  always  done.  I  think  my  hearers  gene- 
rally understand  me  on  this  point,  however. 

XIII.  "All  shall  praise  God,"  is  my  friend's  13th 
argument.  He  quotes  Psalm  cxlv.  10—"  All  thy  -works 
shall  praise  thee,"  leaving  off  the  following  words, 
"  and  thy  saints  shall  bless  thee."  God's  "  works " 
praise  him,  and  his  saints  bless  him.  He  even  nvikes 
the  wrath  of  man  praise  him — "  Surely  the  wrath  of 
man  shall  praise  thee."  Ps.  Ixxvi.  10.  In  the  sanie 
Psalm  from  which  the  gentleman  quoted  his  scrap, 
David  says,  "The  Lord  preserveth  all  them  that  love 
him;  but  all  the  wicked  ivill  he  destroy;  my  mouth 
shall  speak  the  praise  of  the  Lord."  But  after  talking- 
awhile  about  praise,  the  gentleman  told  us  that  "  finally 
all  shall  praise  him,  shall  go  and  worship  before  him, 
and  glorify  his  name."  Did  he  intend  we  should  receive 
that  as  Scripture?  If  so,  I  want  to  know  where  to 
find  it. 

XIV.  "God  is  the  Owner  of  all  mankind."  The  an- 
swer to  the  argument  from  the  "  P'atherhood  of  God  " 
is  the  answer  to  this.  In  one  sense  God  may  be  said  to 
be  the  "  Owner  of  all  men,"  but  not  in  a  moral  sense. 
True,  he  says  "  all  souls  are  mine,"  but  he  follows  that 
up  by  saying  "the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die." 
Morally,  we  are  expressly  told  in  Scripture,  tliat  some 
souls  " are  not  of  the  Father" 


134  Oral  Discussion. 

The  gentleman  asks,  "  what  will  God  do  with  his 
0W71  ?  "  What  did  Jesus  do  with  "  hie  own,"  when 
"he  came  to  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  not"? 

But,  my  friend  continues,  "  Will  he  purify  or  debauch 
his  own  ? "  He  will  certainly  not  "  debauch "  them. 
But  what  will  "  his  own  "  do  with  themselves  ?  Will 
they  "  purify  or  debauch"  themselves?  What  do 
they  do  with  themselves  now  ?  -  Some  of  them  "  de- 
bauch "  themselves,  notwithstanding  they  are  ''  his 
own."     [7^//;2t?  expired. 

i 

\  [mr.  manford's  fifth  speech.] 

My  good  friend  will  have  it,  that  I  slander  the  hell  he 
so  ardently  defends.  That  is  impossible.  If  hell  ineans 
endless  banishment  from  all  of  God's  love,  mercy,  and 
goodness;  from  all  hapj^iness,  all  life,  all  hope;  if  its 
countless  millions  are  given  over,  soul,  spirit  and  body, 
to  the  entire  control  of  satan;  if  naught  but  darkness, 
death,  and  black  despair,  reign  within  its  dismal  borders, 
it  is  utterly  impossible  to  slander  it  or  its  infernal 
keeper.  No  tongue  or  pen  can  do  justice  to  such  a 
place,  to  such  a  doom.  We  may  attempt  to  illustrate 
such  a  hell  by  Nebuchadnezzar's  furnace  heated  seven 
times  hotter  than  common,  but  the  illusti'ation  is  poverty- 
stricken.  It  is  infinitely  worse  than  can  be  imagined 
because  all  its  horrors  are  endless  in  duration.  If  after 
a  hundred  millions  of  years,  its  damnation  should  cease 
by  its  victims  being  a7tnihilated^  we  might,  form  some 
conception  of  the  reality,  but  if  its  woes  are  never  to 
end,  it  is  awful  beyond  any  idea  we  can  form  of  it. 
That  place,  that  condition,  is  what  I  mean  by  the  "  hell 
of  the  creeds."     The   banishment,    the  death,  the  hells, 


Universal  Salvatioit.  125 

the  Bible  speaks  of,  are  quite  unlike  that  terrible  fiction 
of  the  disordered  brain  of  man.  I  do  not  war  against 
a  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,"  but  against  the  follies  and 
crimes  of  this  world.  Mr.  Sweeney  says,  he  uses  only 
Bible  words  when  he  talks  about  punishment.  His 
proposition  for  to-moiTow  is  "  endless  punishment."  I 
have  never  seen  such  a  phrase  in  the  Scriptures. 

My  friend  says,  he  will  find  a  Deist  among  my  breth- 
ren for  every  Annihilationist  I  find  in  his  ranks.  We 
are  all  called  Deists  by  our  enemies  because  we  believe 
the  first  commandment,  so  he  might  find  several  hundred 
thousand  of  such  Bible  Deists  to  offset  the  Annihilation- 
ists  in  his  church. 

My  zealous  opponent  does  not  believe,  with  Tvlr. 
Campbell,  that  God  ci^eates  all  mankind  sinful,  yet  he 
defends  his  father  in  Israel  as  if  he  accepted  all  he  says 
on  that  subject.  Does  not  his  denomination  adopt  Mr. 
C.'s  view.''  I  dwell  on  this  matter  because  it  is  veiy 
important.  If  God  has  created  us  sinful,  he  must  have 
designed  we  should  be  sinful.  Beside,  that  doctrine 
makes  God  the  author  of  sin.  These  two  conclusions 
cannot  be  avoided  if  we  receive  a  sinful  nature  from  our 
Creator. 

Most  other  denominations  contend  for  infant  depravity, 
but  they  have  a  way  of  saving  children.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell and  his  church  believe  in  infant  depravity  and 
sinfulness,  but  have  no  method  of  saving  children.  Aly 
friend  intimates,  that  Mr.  C.  meant  that  only  our  physical 
constitution  is  sinful.  That  gentleman  was  not  such  a 
ninny  as  to  think  the  body  is  sinful.  Sinfulness  only 
pertains  to  our  moral  nature.  The  words  of  Mr.  C. 
are  that  our  "  whole  moral  constitution  "  is  depraved 
and.  greatly  fallen,    that  we   are   born  with   a   "  sinful 


1 26  Oral  Discussi07t. 

nature,"  "hence,"  he  says,  "that  hercditaiy  imbecilit}' 
to  do  good,  and  that  proneness  to  do  evil,  so  universally 
apparent  in  all  beings,"  He  also  calls  the  sinfulness  we 
are  born  with  a  "  moral  distemper,"  "  a  disease  in  the 
moral  constitution."  According  to  this  view,  all  infants 
have  a  sinful  nature,  are  depraved  in  their  whole  moral 
constitution,  have  a  moral  distemper,  are  diseased 
in  their  moral  constitution.  This  is  called  the  primitive 
truth,  and  he  adds,  "  Let  no  one  open  his  mouth " 
against  it.  Now,  if  this  is  even  half  correct,  will  Mr. 
Sweeney  tell  us  how  a  child  dying  in  childhood  can  be 
saved .''  It  certainly  dies  sinful  if  his  spiritual  father  is 
right,  and  both  of  them  contend  that  infant  regeneration 
is  a  Satanic  delusion.  How  then  can  a  child  be  saved.? 
A  being  whose  "  whole  moral  constitution "  is  sinful, 
depraved,  and  greatly  fallen,  surely  needs  regeneration. 
If  anybody  needs  the  washing  of  regeneration  such 
characters  do.  They  are  not  regenerated  in  this  world, 
he  says ;  and  he  also  contends  that  no  one  can  be  regen- 
erated in  the  world  to  come.  What  then  becomes  of 
them  ?  In  my  third  and  fourth  speeches  I  asked  the 
gentleman  this  question — Will  any  be  saved  who  leave 
this  world  sinful  '^.  He  has  not  yet  answered  that  ques- 
tion. If  he  should  reply,  that  none  will  be,  then  he 
and  Mr.  Campbell  together  damn  all  children  who  die 
in  childhood.  If  he  should  reply,  that  persons  can  be 
saved  who  die  sinful,  he  and  I  will  be  one  on  that  ques- 
tion. I  hope  he  will  have  the  goodness  to  answer  that 
important  question  in  his  next  speech.  As  he  makes  a 
great  ado  because  I  cherish  the  hope  that  even  those  of 
my  race  who  depart  this  life  unregenerated  will  finally 
be  purified  by  the  grace  of  God,  I  want  to  know  exactly 
where  he  stands  on  that  subject.  He  must  not  dodge 
that  point  any  longer. 


Universal  Salvation.  127 

It  is  well  known  that  my  friend's  church  teaches,  that 
water  baptism  is  a  condition  of  parv'on.  They  all  tell 
us,  that  the  Gospel  gives  no  assurance  that  sin  can  be 
forgiven  without  immersion  in  water.  If  they  are  cor- 
rect, all  who  live  and  die  without  baptism — and  nothing 
but  immersion,  they  say,  is  baptism — must  live  and  die  in 
sin.  What  then  becomes  of  all  such  persons?  Will 
the  gentleman  enlighten  us?  If  he  will  tell  us  how  one 
adult  can  be  saved,  who  leaves  this  world  unimmersed, 
I  will  tell  him  how  all  can  be.  Will  death  do  the  work  ? 
Will  God  do  it?  Please  be  so  kind  and  condescending 
as  to  answer  these  questions  clearly.  Pi"ay,  brother,  do 
not  go  into  any  more  spasms  about  my  advocating  the 
salvation  of  all  who  die  unregenerated,  till  you  attend  to 
these  matters. 

I  have  not  said,  that  those  who  die  sinful  go  directly 
to  heaven,  or  that  they  are  saved  instantly.  I  have  not 
said,  that  the  good  and  the  bad  go  to  heaven  together, 
for  I  do  not  believe  it,  and  there  is  not  a  man  or  a  woman 
in  the  church  with  which  I  am  connected,  that  believes 
it  either.  I  have  not  said,  that  the  apostle  Paul  was 
saved  instantly.  When  my  friend  gets  excited,  he  some- 
times talks  strangely.  But  I  am  not  surprised  at  his 
excitement,  for  he  evidently  sees  breakers  dashing  all 
around  his  craft.  Let  the  old  hulk  of  endless  damnation 
sink,  brother.  It  is  not  worth  saving.  Jump  into  the 
staunch  ship  of  salvation,  whose  owner  is  the  Father  of 
our  spirits,  whose  captain  is  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and 
whose  passengers  are  the  pure  and  good  of  all  ages  and 
climes.  It  will  outride  the  storm,  and  finally  enter  the 
haven  of  eternal  rest,  loaded  with  all  of  God's  children, 
redeemed,  and  purified.  Jump  in,  and  let  the  old  craft, 
built  by  savage  hands,  go  down.  There  is  not  a  plank 
in  it  worth  saving. 


12S  Oral  Discussion. 

The  gentleman  sneers  at  the  cheering  truth,  that  the 
resurrection  places  man  nearer  his  God,  nearer  to  the 
spirits  of  the  just  made  perfect,  and  consequently  amid 
holier  influences  than  those  of  earth.  He  thinks  it  is  an 
abomination  in  the  sight  of  heaven,  that  God  should 
make  an  effort  to  better  the  condition  of  one  who  leaves 
this  world  unregenerated.  He  seems  to  think,  that 
death  is  the  end  of  God's  mercy,  and  that  beyond  all  is 
dark  and  infernal  to  most  of  our  race.  If  he  can  find 
any  consolation  in  such  a  faith,  he  is  welcome  to  it.  I 
prefer  to  trust  in  God  as  a  universal  and  everlasting 
Savior.  He  placed  us  in  this  world  for  a  wise  and  holy 
purpose,  and  when  in  his  wisdom  he  transfers  us  to'  the 
spirit-land,  I  trust  it  wdll  be  for  an  equally  wise  and  holy 
purpose.  But  this  soul-cheering  view  of  the  divine 
economy  seems  to  disgust  Mr.  Sweeney ;  and  I  am  sorry 
to  see,  that  he  is  evidently  delighted  that  Judas,  Ana- 
nias, Sapphira,  and  as  many  more  as  there  are  pebbles 
on  the  sea  shore,  will,  according  to  his  creed,  be  damned 
as  long  as  God  lives  to  damn  them.  But  he  may  be 
sure  that  savage  spirit  is  not  of  God,  of  Jesus,  of 
Heaven.  It  is  all  of  the  earth  earthy,  and  he  will  have  to 
be  regenerated  by  grace  divine  ere  he  can  partake  of  the 
love  of  the  upper  world.  He  thinks  it  is  an  awful  thing 
for  a  soul  to  grow  wiser  and  better  after  departing  hence, 
but  a  blessed  tiling  for  millions,  made  in  the  image  of 
God,  to  be  consigned  to  the  flames  of  hell,  and  to  the 
claws  of  the  devil.  That  is  a  blessed  hope,  that  makes 
the  heart  leap  with  delight,  that  sanctifies  the  soul. 

He  says,  "  The  man  who  deliberately  rejects  Christ,  is 
gone  forever,  when  he  passes  into  the  future  world." 
Now  see  the  beauty  of  his  creed.  If  such  a  man,  one 
hour  before  he  dies,  accepts  of  Christ  he  is  saved  forever, 


Universal  Salvation. 


139 


according  to  Air.  S.'s  creed.  He  may  liave  rejected 
Christ  seventy  years,  but  by  accepting  of  him  one  short 
hour  before  death  he  goes  straight  to  heaven.  If  that  is 
not  offering  a  bounty  ior  unbeHcf,  what  is  it?  And  then, 
according  to  this  notion,  the  act  of  one  hour  fixes  one's 
condition  eternally.  Is  that  what  the  Bible  means  when 
it  says,  that  God  will  "render  to  eveiy  man  according  to 
his  works " }  The  gentleman  thinks  that  is  a  glorious 
display  of  wisdom,  grace,  justice,  and  love. 

Our  friend  admits  at  last,  that  God  can  "  influence " 
man's  will.  It  is  wonderful,  that  he  should  for  a 
moment  admit  that  Almighty  God  can  possibly  do  so 
much  as  that.  But  says  he,  "  Can  God  co7npcl?  "  He  has 
preached  so  much  that  we  believe  God  will  compel  men 
to  be  saved  whether  they  will  or  not,  he  is  in  a  peck  of 
trouble  because  I  show  that  allegation  to  be  slanderous. 
Making  this  evident,  takes  all  the  wind  from  his  sails, 
and  powder  from  his  guns.  He  admits  all  we  ever 
thought  of,  or  contended  for,  namely,  that  God  ca;?,  and 
does  injlueiice^  the  will  of  man.  It  is  his  purpose  to 
influence  all  for  good  till  life  and  salvation  shall  bless  all 
souls.  Because  a  pirate  was  influenced,  by  the  discovery 
that  God  was  his  Father,  to  repent  of  his  sinful  life,  and 
pray  for  forgiveness,  the  gentleman  cries,  a  farce.  If 
he  had  been  converted  by  fire  and  water,  it  would  have 
been  a  glorious  affair  in  his  estimation.  We  are  taught 
in  the  Bible  that  "  The  goodness  of  God  leadeth  to 
repentance,"  and  are  "persuaded  by  his  mercy T  But 
according  to  this  professed  minister  of  Christ  that  is  all 
&  farce.  Jesus  said,  "Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  God 
is  at  hand."  That  is  another  farce.  If  he  had  said. 
Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  hell  is  at  hand,  it  would 
have  been  sublime,  and  this  minister  would  have  screamed 
Amen. 


130  Oral  Discussion. 

In  my  last  speech  I  read  one  of  the  grandest  passages 
in  the  Bible,  concerning  the  influence  of  grace  and  huith 
on  the  heart  and  life.  The  "  word,"  the  Lord  says, 
"  Shall  not  return  void,"  it  '•'■shall  accomplish  its  work  " 
in  the  redemption  of  man,  it  ^''  shall  prosper"  in  doing  that 
for  which  it  "was  sent.  God  had  a  purpose  in  giving  the 
world  the  word  of  truth;  he  purposed  that  the  world 
should  be  saved  by  it,  and  that  purpose  SHALL  be 
effected,  saith  the  Most  High,  and  I  believe  it.  Shall, 
here  means  certain,  and  it  has  that  meaning  in  all  the 
Promises  I  expect  to  cite.  Let  us  have  no  more  of  this 
stale  nonsense  about  "  compel,"  and  "  force."  My  breth- 
ren believe  nothing  of  it.  The  gentleman  only  makes 
himself  ridiculous  by  splitting  his  throat,  and  knocking 
this  pulpit  to  pieces  with  those  words.  But  he  jumped 
from  the  Old  to  the  New  Testament,  from  Isaiah  to  Acts, 
to  find,  as  he  thinks,  a  "shall"  that  means  7tothing. 
"  Him  shall  ye  hear  in  all  things,"  he  quotes,  and  then 
adds,  "I  suppose  he  thinks  that  is  certain'^  Of  course 
I  do.  Its  meaning  is  as  clear  as  daylight.  It  shall  be 
their  duty  to  hear  Christ  in  all  things.  And  it  is  noiv^ 
and  it  eternally  will  be  the  duty  of  all  to  hear  Christ  in 
all  things.  I  know  he  denies  this,  and  contends  that 
after  awhile  it  will  not  be  the  duty  of  millions  to  hear 
Christ,  but  to  hear  and  obey  satan. 

The  gentleman  sticks  to  it,  that  "at  hand"  and 
"  quickly "  means  from  two  to  one  hundred  thousand 
years,  or  even  a  million  of  times  longer  for  all  he  knows. 
Why  will  he  not  heed  evidence,  I'eason,  and  common 
sense?  Was  revelation  given  to  deceive  or  instruct.'' 
In  addition  to  what  has  been  offered,  note  this  verse  — 
"  Seal  not  the  sayings  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book,  for 
the  time  is  at  hand."     The  book  was  not  to  he  scaled  for 


Universal  Salvation.  131 

the  reason  the  thnc  was  at  hand  when  it  was  to  be  ful- 
filled, showing  to  all  who  want  to  know  the  truth  that 
"  at  hand  "  and  "  quickly  "  docs  not  mean  thousands  of, 
ages.  If  thousands  of  years  were  to  pass  away  before 
the  prophecy  was  to  be  fulfilled,  the  angel  would  have 
said,  "  Seal  the  book,  for  the  time  is  not  at  hand." 

But  even  if  the  gentleman's  absurdity  here  should  be 
admitted  to  be  correct,  namely,  that  at  hand  does  not 
mean  at  hand,  and  quickly  does  not  mean  quickly,  and 
that  the  passage  refers  to  the  great  judgment  at  the 
winding  up  of  the  material  universe,  it  does  not  prove 
that  some  will  be  sinful  eternally.  Wc  have  seen  that 
"let"  does  not  mean  shall^  and  "still"  does  not  mean 
endless.  My  friend  is  a  wonderful  expositor.  "  Shall  " 
means  nothing,  or  next  to  nothing,  when  it  refers  to  the 
purposes  of  God,  but  it  means  shall  loud  and  long 
when  it  relates  to  the  damnation  of  man.  And  "  still  " 
in  the  passage  he  labels  endless  because  he  thinks  hell 
is  in  it.  I  will  read  a  few  passages  where  still  occurs,  to 
enlighten  him  concerning  that  Httle  word.  "As  I 
besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus."  i  Tim.  i.  3. 
"Silas  and  Timothy  abode  there  5////."  Acts  xvii.  14. 
"Then  Martha,  as  soon  as  she  heard  that  Jesus  was 
coming,  went  and  met  him;  but  Mary  sat  still  in  the 
house."  John  xi.  20.  According  to  brother  Sweeney's 
luminous  exposition,  Silas  and  Timothy  are  at  Ephesus 
yet,  and  will  stay  there  eternally;  Mary  is  sitting  in  her 
house  in  Bethany,  and  will  sit  tlicre  eternally.  If  after  all 
this  testimony  he  will  contend  that  "let"  means  endless^ 
"  shall,"  nothing,  and  " at  hand"  and  "quickly,"  thou- 
sands of  years,  I  shall  have  to  give  him  over  to  hardness 
of  heart. 

In  a  previous  speech  he  cited   my  words,  "  God  gov- 


132  Oral  Discussion. 

ernsall  men,"  and  then  added,  '•'•What  a  government  V 
I  told  him  that  an  Atheist  never  uttered  more  iiTcvei^ent 
words,  and  he  replies,  "  I  repeat,  with  emphasis,  all  I 
said."  But  he  did  not  repeat  those  infidel  words,  but 
some  others,  and  I  am  glad  he  did  not ;  but  he  should 
not  have  said  he  did. 

Because  I  said  we  have  the  power  of  choice,  and  he  is 
evidently  sorry  I  said  so,  he  jumps  headlong  to  the  con- 
clusion that  some  will  choose  to  sin  eternally.  Has  not 
God  the  power  of  choice.''  Plas  not  Christ  the  power  of 
choice.?  Have  not  the  angels  the  power  of  choice.? 
Have  not  the  redeemed  the  power  of  choice.?  This,  I 
suppose,  he  will  admit.  Then  may  God,  Christ,  angels, 
the  redeemed,  sin  eternally .?  If  not,  then  none  of  man- 
kind may  sin  eternally,  though  they  will  have  the  power 
of  choice.  But  he  thinks  the  damned  will  not  have  the 
liberty  of  choice,  that  they  will  be  compelled  to  go  down, 
down,  forever,  and  he  refers  to  the  rich  man,  and  says, 
"  The  rich  inan  did  not  seem  to  have  the  power  of  choice 
after  he  left  this  world."  That  is  a  mistake.  He  chose 
to  have  his  tongue  cooled;  he  chose  to  save  his  brethren 
from  coming  to  that  hot  place ;  he  chose  to  make  a  good 
prayer,  and  he  made  it.  If  the  hell  in  which  was  the 
rich  man  is  a  place  of  endless  torment,  it  is  a  place  of 
■prayer.  What  does  brother  S.  think  the  devil  was  about 
to  allow  one  of  his  subjects  to  pray .? 

He  tells  us,  that  two  statements  I  made,  namely,  that 
all  ai'e  not  God's  children  morally,  and  none  can  be  saved 
till  they  are  God's  children  morally,  "  knock  my  faith 
into  pi."  It  does,  I  admit,  as  it  is  represented  by  our 
opposers,  and  as,  I  suppose,  Mr.  S.  generally  represents 
it.  But  both  statements  are  fundamental  truths  with  us, 
and  much  dwelt  on  in  our  ministrations. 


Universal  Salvation.  133 

I  showed  in  my  last  speech,  that  all  mankind  are,  and 
eternally  will  be,  in  God's  image.  He  does  not  deny 
this.  I  then  asked, "  What  will  God  do  with  his  images  ?" 
Mr.  S.  does  not  answer  this  question,  but  says,  "  what 
does  God  do  with  his  images  noxv  ?  "  My  reply  is,  God 
is  good  to  all  now,  he  is  merciful  to  all  now,  he  is  bless- 
in<y  all  now,  he  gives  all  opportunities  to  be  saved  now. 
That  is  what  he  is  doing  with  his  "  images"  noiv.  But 
this  is  all  to  be  reversed^  according  to  the  creeds,  the 
instant  most  of  them  enter  the  other  world.  I,  on  the 
other  hand,  contend,  that  God  eternally  will  be  good 
to  all,  merciful  to  all,  bless  all.  Which  view  is  most 
godlike  }  God  made  man  in  his  image  to  bless  him,  and 
he  will  bless  him  forever  and  ever.  If  we  abuse  our 
noble  nature  we  are  punished,  and  that  punishment  is  for 
a  benevolent  purpose,  to  cause  us  to  live  righteously  and 
godly,  to  live  in  harmony  with  our  divine  nature. 

Yes,  "  All  God's  works  shall  praise  him."  They 
reflect  his  Power,  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Mercy,  and 
Justice,  and  they  will  do  that  eternally.  But  will  end- 
less hell-torments  reflect  those  divine  qualities?  True, 
"  the  wrath  of  man  praises  God,"  because  God  overrules 
it  for  good.  But  if  that  wrath  should  rage  eternally 
what  good  could  it  do?  As  sure  as  "All  God's  works 
shall  praise  him,"  millions  will  not  curse  him  world 
without  end. 

The  gentleman  admits  that  all  souls  belong  to  God, 
in  one  sense,  although  not  his  morally.  Agreed.  All 
souls  are  God's,  but  not  morally;  all  mankind  are  God's 
children,  but  not  morally;  all  are  in  the  divine  image, 
but  not  morally.  Thus  far  we  agree.  Now,  I  contend, 
that  inasmuch  as  all  mankind  are  the  children  of  God, 
are  in  the  image  of  God,  and  ai-e  owned  by  God,  "  that 


134  Oral  Discussion. 

in  the  dispensation  of  the  fuUness  of  times,"  all  will  be 
his  children,  morally,  all  in  his  image,  morally,  all  his 
own,  morally.  All  proceed  from  God,  have  their  root 
in  God,  and  will  finally  return  to  him. 

Before  I  close,  I  will  offer  some  additional  evidences 
of  the  Truth  I  am  here  to  defend. 

XV.  The  Bible  abounds  in  great  and  precious 
Promises.  The  apostle  Peter  asserts  that  "  the 
Restitution  of  All  Things  was  spoken  by  all 
God's  holy  prophets  since  the  world  began."  Let 
us  examine  some  of  the  Promises  of  the  restitution 
of  all  things,  to  which  he  refers.  I  will  begin 
with  the  Promise  to  the  fathers  of  the  Jewish  nation. 

To  Abraham  he  said,  "  In  thee  shall  all  the 
families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  Gen.  xii.  3.  This 
was  repeated  to  Abraham  again  and  again.  "And  the 
Lord  said,  '  Shall  I  hide  from  Abraham  that  thing  which 
I  do ;  seeing  that  Abraham  shall  surely  become  a  gi^eat 
and  mighty  nation,  and  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  shall 
be  blessed  in  him?'"  Gen.  xvili.  17,  18.  Again — "In 
thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed." 
Gen.  xxii.  18.  This  same  Promise  was  renewed  to 
Xsaac — "  I  will  perform  the  oath  which  I  sware  unto 
Abraham  thy  fixther,  and  I  will  make  thy  seed  to  multi- 
ply as  the  stars  of  heaven,  and  I  will  give  unto  thy  seed 
all  these  countries.  And  In  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth  be  blessed."  Gen.  xxvi.  3,  4.  This  Promise 
was  confirmed  to  Jacob — "  In  thee,  and  In  thy  seed, 
shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  Gen. 
xxvlii.   14. 

This  Promise  surely  includes  all  mankind.  All 
nations^  all  families^  all  kindreds,  as  Peter  quotes  It, 
cannot  mean  some  nations,  some  families,  so?ne  kindreds. 


Utziversal  Salvation.  13^ 

I  understand  the  passages  just  as  they  read.  The  bles- 
sing is  sure.  Shall  is  repeated  five  times.  All  shall  be 
blessed.  I  do  not  understand  the  word  to  mean  may. 
All  shall  be  blessed.  This  word  is  also  repeated  five 
times,  and  I  do  not  read  it  curse  once. 

All  shall  be  blessed  in  "  thy  seed"  which  the  apostle 
Paul  understood  to  be  Jesus  Christ.  "  Now  to  Abraham 
and  his  seed  were  the  promises  made.  He  saith  not, 
And  to  seeds  as  of  many,  but  as  of  one.  And  in  thy 
seed  which  is  Christ."  Gal.  iii.  16.  All  shall  be 
blessed  in  Christ.  That  is  the  reading  of  the  Promise; 
that  is  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  Promise,  and  that  is 
what  Peter  calls  "  the  restitution  of  all  things." 

This  Promise  is  the  Gospel.  "  And  the  Scriptures, 
foreseeing  that  God  would  justify  the  heathen  throuo-h 
faith,  preached  before  the  Gospel  unto  Abraham,  saying, 
*In  thee  shall  all  nations  be  blessed.'  "  Gal.  iii.  8. 
Those  who  preach  that  God  will  bless  all  mankind  by 
Jesus  Christ  are  Gospel  preachers,  and  those  who  do  not 
preach  this,  are  not  Gospel  preachers.  Which  then  is  the 
Gospel  minister — Mr.  Sweeney  or  myself,?  But  this 
is  not  all.  Listen  to  the  apostle  Peter  at  the  Beautiful 
Gate  of  the  temple,  "  Ye  are  the  childi-cn  of  the  pro- 
phets and  of  the  covenant  which  God  made  with  our 
fathers,  saying  unto  Abraham,  And  in  thy  seed  shall  all 
the  kindreds  of  the  earth  be  blessed.  Unto  3'ou  first 
God  having  raised  up  his  Son  Jesus,  sent  him  to  bless 
you,  in  turning  away  every  one  of  you  fi'om  his  iniqui- 
ties" Acts  iii.  25,  36.  The  promised  seed  will  bless 
all  by  turning  them  from  their  iniquities.,  and  that  is 
the  Gospel.  Mark  you,  the  Gospel  is  not,  that  lie  will 
curse  millions  by  turning  them  into  an  endless  hell. 
That  is  a  false  Gospel.     May  we  all,  heart  and   soul, 


136  Oral  Discussion. 

believe  the  true  Gospel,  and  may  these  thirty  ministers 
preach  the  true  Gospel,  May  they  feed  the  people  with 
the  bread  of  life  and  nothing  else. 

But  this  is  not  the  whole  of  this  Promise,  this  Gospel. 
It  includes  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  As  the  Gospel 
includes  the  resurrection,  this  Promise  does,  as  it  is  the 
Gospel.  In  his  address  to  king  Agrippa,  Paul  indicates 
that  the  resurrection  is  included  in  the  Abrahamic 
promise,  "  And  now  I  stand,  and  am  judged,  for  the 
hope  of  the  Promise  made  of  God  unto  our  fiithers; 
unto  which  Promise  our  twelve  tribes,  instantly  sei^ving 
God  day  and  night,  hope  to  come.  For  which  hope's 
sake,  king  Agrippa,  I  am  accused  of  the  Jews.  Why 
should  it  be  thought  a  thing  incredible  w^ith  you,  that 
God  should  raise  the  dead  }  "  Acts  xxvi.  6,  7,  8.  It  is 
clear,  then,  that  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  part  of 
the  Promise  to  the  old  patriarchs.  All  nations,  all  fam- 
ilies, all  kindreds,  all  who  die  in  Adam,  are  to  be 
BLESSED  by  being  raised  from  the  dead.  Would  raising 
countless  millions  from  the  dead  on  purpose  to  curse 
them  eternally  be  a  blessing.''  My  friend  is  preaching 
another  Gospel.  I  wish  to  impress  on  the  minds  of  all 
who  hear,  of  all  who  read  this  discussion,  that  the 
resurrectioit  is  included  in  the  blessing  promised  to  the 
patriarchs.  And  let  it  never  be  forgotten,  that  according 
to  that  Promise,  all  are  to  be  blessed  by  being  raised 
from  the  dead.     \^Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  fifth  reply.] 

If  Mr.  Manford  has  so  much  trouble  with  his  "  good 
friend  "  about  "  the  hell  he  so  ardently  defends,"  before 


Universal  Salvatioft.  i^y 

his  "good  friend"  has  said  anything  about  the  matter 
except  in  reply,  what  will  be  his  trouble  when  his 
"good  friend"  shall  take  the  affirmative,  and  undertake 
to  prove  sometliing? 

Who  has  said  that  "  hell  means  endless  banishment 
from  all  of  God's  love"?  I  have  not  said  what  hell 
means.  With  whom  is  the  gentleman  debating  ?  with 
his  "good  friend"  who  is  present?  If  so,  let  him  attend 
to  what  his  "good  friend"  says  to-day,  and  leave  to- 
morrow's work  for  to-morrow.  If  he  keeps  on  at  his 
present  rate  he  will  have  exhausted  all  his  negative 
thunder  before  he  is  fairly  in  the  negative — and  then 
what  will  he  do  ?  I  promise  him  now  that  in  due  time 
he  "  shall  "  have  my  views  as  to  the  destiny  of  all  who 
leave  this  world  sinful,  and  the  Scriptures  from  which 
they  are  derived. 

The  gentleman  says,  my  "  proposition  for  to-morrow 
is  '  endless  punishment,'  and  "  he  "  has  never  seen  such 
a  phrase  in  the  Scriptures."  Well,  has  he  ever  "  seen 
such  a  phrase  in  the  Scriptures "  as  endless  happiness, 
endless  bliss,  endless  joy,  endless  salvation,  endless 
heaven,  or  endles?,  ajtything^  promised  toman?  But  I 
do  not  press  him  to  answer  now,  as  we  ought  to  discuss 
the  first  question  first — and  it  shall  not  be  my  fault  if  we 
do  not.  "  Endless  "  will  come  up  properly  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  our  second  question,  and  he  will  find  that 
"  sufficient  unto  the  day  is  the  evil  thereof,"  for  his 
cause. 

My  friend  saj's,  his  "  zealous  opponent  does  not 
believe,  with  Mr.  Campbell,  that  God  created  all  man- 
kind sinful."  Then  he  ought  to  come  up  with  his 
"  zealous  friend "  in  courtesy  and  manliness,  and  so 
have  done  with  the  matter  of  infant  damnation.     When 

12 


13S  Oral  Discussion. 

he — after  first  insinuating  that  his  opponent  had  "  gar- 
bled Mr.  Ballou  " — said  he  did  "not  subscribe"  to  all 
Mr.  Ballou  had  taught,  his  opponent,  after  proper 
attention  to  the  insinuation  as  to  garbling,  proceeded  to 
argue  widi  JMr.  Alanford  without  holding  him  respon- 
sible for  Mr.  Ballou's  teaching.  I  deny,  however,  that 
Mr.  Campbell  ever  taught,  either  expressly  or  by  neces- 
sary implication,  anything  that  involves  the  necessity  of 
moral  regeneration,  in  order  to  the  ultimate  happiness 
of  infants.  Why  does  he  not  produce  Mr.  Campbell's 
book  from  which  he  quotes,  as  I  did  when  I  quoted  Mr. 
Ballou  ?  But  no  matter  what  Mr.  Campbell  may  have 
said,  the  gentleman  should  remember  he  is  debating 
with  7ne^  and  that  I  deny  most  emphatically  that  infants 
are  sinners,  and  hence  that  they  need  any  moral  regene- 
ration in  order  to  their  ultimate  happiness. 

My  friend  seems  to  think  I  am  afraid  of  his  question, 
"  Will  any  be  saved  who  leave  this  world  sinful  ?  "  He 
made  a  wonderful  ado  over  the  matter,  as  if  I  were 
really  between  the  horns  of  an  unmerciful  dilemma.  If 
I  go  one  way,  in  my  answer,  then  Mr.  Campbell  and  I 
together  "  damn  all  that  die  in  childhood ; "  and  if  I  go 
the  other  way,  then  "  he  and  I  would  be  together  on 
the  question."  Well,  suppose  I  were  to  say,  without 
authority — for  it  would  certainly  be  without  authority 
were  I  to  say  so — that  '•'•some  persons  can  be  saved  who 
die  sinful,"  would  that  be  equivalent  to  saying  all  who 
die  sinful  will  be  saved  ?  I  think  not ;  but  Mr.  Manford 
thinks  it  would.  Bad  doctrine  often  produces  bad  logic. 
He  hopes  I  "  will  have  the  goodness  to  answer  that  im- 
portant question."  Well,  I  shall  not  answer  it;  but  I 
hope  the  gentleman  will  allow  me  to  assure  him  that  it 
is  not  for  lack  of  "  goodness  "  so  much  as  of  information. 


Universal  Salvation.  139 

Mr.  Manford  has  undertaken  to  give  us  information  on 
"  this  important  question,"  and  failed ;  and  I  hope  he 
will  therefore  feel  inclined  to  excuse  me.  That  any  who 
die  sinful  will  be  saved  is  what  God  has  not  revealed, 
and  that  is  the  reason  my  friend  fails,  and  turns  about 
to  catechizing  me  on  the  subject.  I  have  not  once 
thought  of  referring  his  failure  to  a  want  of  "  goodness." 
Evidently  he  fails  only  for  want  of  ability.  I  am  sorry 
I  cannot  help  him  out. 

Then  the  gentleman  seems  to  think  that  all  who  leave 
this  world  sinful  will  stand  to  salvation  just  as  the  man 
who  makes  a  mistake  about  the  form  of  baptism!  I 
believe  baptism  is  "  for  the  remission  of  sins."  Of 
course  I  do;  I  believe  all  the  Bible  says.  But  I  never 
once  thought  of  placing  the  man  who  has  a  heart  and 
a  will  to  obey  God,  but  simply  mistakes  the  form  of  one 
ordinance,  alongside  of  him  who  all  his  life  deliberately 
rejects  Christ,  and  spurns  his  authority.  I  can  conceive 
of  the  one  being  accepted  and  the  other  rejected,  and 
yet  God's  law  fully  vindicated. 

My  friend  denies  having  said  "  that  those  who  die 
sinful  go  directly  to  heaven,  or  that  they  are  saved  in- 
stantly." He  says,  moreover,  almost  vehemently,  "  I 
have  not  said  that  the  good  and  the  bad  go  to  heaven 
together."  Then  I  submit  that  "  he  and  I  are  together 
on  that  question."  Now,  will  he  tell  us  where  the 
"bad"  do  go?  He  believes  the  bad  go  somewhere 
directly,  unless  he  is  a  Soul  Sleeper.  Then  is  it  possible 
he  believes  in  a  "  Purgatory  "  ?  Do  the  "  bad  "  go  to 
any  better  place  than  this  world  ?  If  so,  we  would  be 
pleased  to  know  something  about  that  place.  It  must  be 
that  there  are  better  people,  better  preachers,  and  holier 
influences  there  than  here,  else  my  friend  could  not  be 


140  Oral  Discussion. 

so  certain  that  sinners  who  cannot  be  converted  here  will 
all  be  so  certain  to  be  converted  there — unless,  forsooth, 
they  are  to  be  converted  by  "  devils  and  fire."  Certainly 
he  believes  nothing  of  that  kind.  I  am  at  a  loss  to 
know  what  my  opponent  docs  believe.  He  succeeds 
infinitely  better  in  telling  us  what  he  does  not  believe. 
He  certainly  does  believe  that  the  sinner  lives  in  "  hell " 
while  in  this  world.  Does  he  think  he  dies  out.''  that  is, 
that  death  takes  him  out  of  hell.''  Then  where  does  it 
take  him  to,  if  not  "  directly  to  heaven  " }  We  want 
more  light  just  along  here.  The  gentleman's  theology 
leaves  a  dark  hiatus  in  the  sinner's  career.  I  am  not  at 
all  surprised  that  he  thinks  I  am  "  excited."  His  con- 
fusion is  quite  sufficient  to  make  the  universe  seem 
afloat.  He  thinks  I  am  "excited"  because  my  "craft" 
is  in  danger;  and  exhorts  me  to  "  let  the  old  hulk  sink," 
and  "jump  into  the  staunch  ship  of  salvation,"  whose 
passengers  "  are  the  pure  and  good  of  all  ages  and 
climes,"  and  wWch  "  will  outride  the  storm  and  finally 
enter  the  haven  of  eternal  rest."  Now,  it  strikes  me 
this  is  a  new  and  singular  sort  of  preaching  and  exhort- 
ation for  a  Universalist — quite  an  improvement,  too,  upon 
the  old  kind.  But  suppose  I  refuse  to  "jump  on  the 
staunch  ship  of  salvation  "  that  is  going  to  "  outride  die 
storm  and  finally  enter  the  haven  of  eternal  rest" — sup- 
pose I  stick  to  the  "  old  hulk" — what  of  it.-*  Will  not  my 
"old  hulk,"  and  every  other  "old  hulk"  and  "craft" 
that  has  a  single  passenger  aboard,  "  outride  the  storm 
and  finally  enter  the  haven  of  eternal  rest,  "  too  }  Why 
be  jumping  from  one  "  craft"  to  another?  Or,  if  all 
"  hulks  "  and  "  crafts  "  but  the  one  are  destined  to  "  go 
down,"  will  not  that  one  remain  at  sea  till  she  has  gath- 
ered all  passengers,  of  whatever  kind,  from  all  the  sink- 


Universal  Salvation.  141 

ing  hulks  and  crafts,  whether  they  are  wilhng  to  jump 
aboard  or  not?  Certainly,  if  Universalism  be  true. 
Then,  why  "jump"?  If  my  friend  is  right,  then  what 
ship  or  craft  one  rides  on  is  purely  a  matter  of  taste ! 
What  if  the  "waves  are  dashing  about  my  craft"! 
Can  I  "go  down"?  Dowmvhere?  Will  my  friend's 
ship  "  enter  the  haven  of  eternal  rest "  without  anybody  ? 

I  am  chided  by  my  opponent  for  denying  that  the 
"  resun-ection  places  the  sinner  nearer  his  God,  nearer 
the  spirits  of  the  just  made  perfect,  and  consequently 
amid  holier  influences  than  those  of  earth."  It  seems 
to  me  now  is  "  the  proper  time  "  for  the  gentleman  to 
tell  us  what  he  means  by  "  the  resurrection."  With  my 
view  of  the  resurrection,  I  certainly  can  see  nothing  in 
it  to  purge  the  conscience  from  sin,  and  place  a  sinner 
morally  "  nearer  to  God,"  or  "  amid  holier  influences 
than  those  of  earth."  If  the  gentleman  sees  anything 
in  the  rcsuiTection  to  do  all  this,  it  must  be  because  of  a 
different  view  of  the  resurrection  itself,  and  he  ought  by 
all  means  to  hasten  to  give  us  that  view.  Shall  we  have 
it? 

Mr.  Manford  is  disposed  to  "  trust  in  God  as  a  univer- 
sal and  an  everlasting  Savior,"  because  he  thinks,  "  He 
placed  us  in  this  world  for  a  wise  and  holy  purpose,"  and 
that  he  will,  of  course,  remove  us  only  for  a  like  pur- 
pose. But  do  all  ans-ioer  "  a  wise  and  holy  purpose  "  in 
this  world  ?  We  agree  that  all  do  not,  notwithstanding 
"  God  placed  us  here  for  a  wise  and  holy  purpose." 
Then,  though  God  may  purpose  a  wise  and  holy  pur- 
pose concerning  our  future,  we  may  never  answer  that 
purpose  for  the  same  reason  that  some  do  not^  here.  It 
is  better  to  trust  in  Christ  because  he  is  "  the  author  of 
eternal  salvation  to  all  them  that  obey  him." 


142  Oral  Discussion. 

My  friend  seems  to  think  I  am  "delighted  that  Judas, 
Ananias,  Sapphira,"  and  others,  "  will  be  damned  as 
long  as  God  lives  to  damn  them."  He  mistakes  me 
greatly.  I  am  just  as  far  as  I  can  be  from  being 
"delighted"  that  many  are  damned  in  />^w  world.  In 
the  spirit  of  Jesus,  I  trust,  I  deeply  mourn  the  sad  fact. 
But  mourning  of  the  righteous  alone  cannot  save  sin- 
ners, or  tears,  partly  divine,  would  have  saved  Jerusalem, 
as  they  would  doubtless  save  all  men.  I  would  "  have 
all  to  be  saved  and  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth,"  and  for  an  end  so  devoutly  desired,  I  think  I  am 
willing  to  labor  as  long  and  as  earnestly  as  any  one,  in 
the  ratio  of  my  ability ;  but  I  must  be  pardoned,  if  it  be 
my  crime,  that  I  think  telling  sinners  that  "  regenera- 
tion will  be  eflected  infinitely  easier  on  the  golden  shore 
than  in  this  world,"  and  that  all  who  leave  this  world 
sinful  will  certainly  be  saved  there,  better  calculated  to 
defeat  than  to  accomplish  the  end.  I  am  sorry  my  friend 
thinks  I  have  "  a  savage  spirit."  But  I  should  be  inore 
so  to  think  it  myself.  If  he  is  right  in  his  judgment 
of  me,  then  he  is  certainly  right  in  telling  me  that  I 
"  will  have  to  be  regenerated  by  Grace  divine  ere  I  can 
partake  of  the  love  of  the  upper  world."  Will  he 
preach  that  way  to  all  who  have  "  a  savage  spirit,"  and 
have  done  with  his  unauthorized  and  wretchedly  licen- 
tious doctrine,  that  "  regeneration  will  be  effected 
infinitely  easier  on  the  golden  shore".''  The  Savior 
said,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit 
he  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of  God> "  and  if  my 
friend  would  catch  up  the  theme  and  devote  his  talent 
and  energies  to  it,  it  would  do  vastly  more  good,  in  my 
humble  judgment,  than  all  he  knows  about  "  regenera- 
tion on  the  golden  shore." 


Universal  Salvation. 


H3 


The  gentleman  has  many  things  to  say  about  my 
"  beheving  in  hell,"  "hoping  in  hell,"  making  "■God  a 
fiend,"  and  "  hating  the  sinner,"  that,  for  very  obvious 
reasons,  I  shall  pass  by.  I  w^ill  be  judged  by  what  I  say, 
and  not  by  what  Mr.  M.  says  of  me.  If  he  thinks  thus 
to  irritate  me,  it  were  well  for  him  to  know  that  I  am  not 
his  man. 

Who,  but  my  opponent,  has  understood  me  to  teach 
that  one  "  may  have  rejected  Christ  seventy  years,  but 
by  accepting  of  him  one  short  hour  before  he  dies,  go 
straight  to  heaven " }  I  have  very  little  faith  in  such 
conversions.  I  class  them  all  with  the  conversion  of 
that  "condemned  pirate"  that  the  gentleman  recited  to 
us  yesterday  with  so  much  pathos,  and  mark  them 
"doubtful."  One  who  purposely  delays  accepting 
Christ  till  "  one  short  hour  before  he  dies,"  or  till  he 
reaches  "the  golden  shore,"  and  gets  "one  glimpse"  of 
"  the  glory  of  the  upper  world,"  may,  perchance,  "  seek 
to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able."  True,  one  may  be 
converted  just  before  he  dies,  but  it  will  not  be  likely  to 
be  one  who  has  all  his  "  seventy  years  "  deliberately  cal- 
culated to  accept  Christ  "  one  short  hour  before  he  dies." 
Such  an  one  will  perhaps  be  disappointed  in  his  calcu- 
lation— as  may  he  who  defers  his  return  until  he  reaches 
the  golden  shore,  where,  he  may  have  been  taught,  with 
all  its  "advantages,"  "regeneration  will  be  effected  infi- 
nitely easier"  than  here,  where  he  is  compassed  with 
infirmities,  "  appetites  and  passions,"  and  a  mortal 
"  body."  The  man  who  received  full  wages  for  a  day's 
work  begun  at  the  eleventh  hour,  was  the  one  whom  no 
one  had  offered  employment  earlier.  We  are  not  to  be 
judged  by  the  number  of  deeds  done  in  the  body,  and 
justified  or  condemned  as  the  good  or  bad  may  outnum- 


144  Oral  Discussion. 

ber,  but  by  the  moral  character  of  the  deeds  of  hfe — and 
Christ  received  by  faith  and  held  fast  by  faithful  and 
prayerful  obedience,  will  give  moral  character  to  one^s 
life.  Universalism  tinkers  about  all  the  atonement  out 
of  the  Gospel,  and  hence  my  friend's  trouble  on  this 
point. 

But  Mr.  Manford  thinks  that  "pirate"  was  led  to 
repentance  "  by  the  discovery  that  God  was  his  Father." 
Perhaps  so.  It  is  a  case  open  to  suspicion,  however.  It 
might  be  suspected  that  the  "discovery"  of  his  approach 
to  the  gallows: — to  doom — to  "  fire  " — had  something  to 
do  with  it.  He  says  the  pirate  "  pi'ayed  for  forgiveness." 
Indeed !  And  does  he  believe  in  forgiveness  "  one  short 
hour"  before  death.''  It  would  be  interesting  to  have  a 
Universalist  tell  us  what  "forgiveness"  a  dying  man 
should  pray  for,  since  they  all  hold  that  every  man  must 
be  punished  for  eveiy  sin  he  commits  —  that  there  is  no 
pardon,  really! 

I  am  not  at  all  inclined  to  add  to  the  troubles  my 
opponent  has  with  his  "  shalls,"  for  his  case  has  already 
drawn  largely  on  my  sympathies.  But  I  must  keep 
things  straight  as  we  go  on.  We  are  told  that,  as  God 
has  said,  "  Him  shall  ye  hear  in  all  things,"  "  it  eternally 
will  be  the  duty  of  all  to  hear  Christ  in  all  things." 
Well,  I  deny  that  it  eternally  will  be  even  the  privilege 
of  all  to  hear  Christ.  So  here  we  have  a  plain  issue. 
My  friend  thinks  it  will  be  the  duty,  and  of  course,  the 
privilege,  of  all  "  eternally  to  hear  Christ."  I  deny  it, 
squarely.  I  say  that  when  "  all  that  are  in  the  graves 
shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth,  they  that  have 
done  good  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that 
have  done  evil  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation,"  then 
the  privilege  of  hearing  Christ,  as  Prophet,  Priest  and 


Universal  Salvation.  145 

King,"  will  have  forever  gone.  I  consider  this  matter 
vital  in  our  controversy,  and  therefore  have  not  brought 
it  forward  until  I  am  satisfied  I  understand  my  oppo- 
nent fully.  We  live  in  a  Dispeiisation.  God's  dealings 
with  us  are  dispensational.  This  Dispensation  w^ill  end. 
This  fact  seems  to  havew^holly  escaped  my  friend's  atten- 
tion. His  theory  cannot  admit  it.  And  if  I  hold  this 
position,  it,  of  itself,  upsets  all  his  arguments  at  once. 
Then  to  the  law^  and  the  testimony  we  go.  "  For  as  in 
Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive; 
but  every  man  in  his  own  order;  [and  this  accords  with 
Christ's  own  testimony— "  They  that  have  done  good, 
unto  the  resurrection  of  life;  and  they  that  have  done 
evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation  " — but  we  go  on 
with  Paul's  testimony];  Christ  the  first  fruits;  after- 
ward they  that  are  Chrisfs  at  his  coming.  Then  Com- 
eth THE  END,  when  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the 
kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father— when  he  shall  have 
put  down  all  rule,  and  authority,  and  power;  for  he 
must  reign  ////  [not  eternally,  but  till]  he  hath  put  all 
enemies  [who  are  they  ?]  under  his  feet.  The  last  enemy 
that  shall  be  destroyed  [enemies  are  to  be  destroyed, 
mark,]  is  death.  *  *  *  *  And  when  all  things 
shall  be  subdued  unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  him- 
self be  subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things  under  him, 
that  God  may  be  all  in  all."  i  Cor.  xv.  32-28.  Let  it 
be  observed  that  all  "enemies"  are  to  be  "put  under  his 
feet,"  are  to  be  "  destroyed."  Death  is  one  of  these  "  ene- 
mies." But  what  other  enemies  are  to  be  "  destroyed  "  ? 
Paul  himself  shall  tell  us :  "  For  mafzy  walk,  of  whom 
I  have  told  you  often,  and  now  tell  you  even  weep- 
ing,  [not  "delighted"],  that  they  are  the  enemies  of  the 
cross  of  Christ;  whose  end  is  destruction."  Philip,  ui. 
13 


14^  Oral  Discussion. 

18,  19.  When  "the  enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ " 
have  rushed  on  to  their  own  "  destruction,"  and,  refusing 
to  accept  Christ  as  their  Savior,  have  been  "  put  down," 
"  put  under  his  feet,"  then  'will  come  the  end  of  the  reign 
of  Christ.  The  kingdom  will  be  delivered  up  to  God, 
even  the  Father,  and  in  that  kingdom.,  God  will  be  all  in 
all.  Then  the  enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ  will  only 
have  the  privilege  of  hearing  him  say,  once  for  all,  "  De- 
part from  me,  all  ye  workers  of  iniquit}%"  God  will 
still  be  Love,  and  Goodness,  and  Mercy,  and  Holiness, 
and  Justice;  but  there  will  be  no  longer  a  Mediator — no 
longer  a  mediatorial  dispensation.  We  may  criticise 
this,  I  know,  and  murmur,  and  complain ;  but  God  does 
all  things  righteously  and  justly,  whether  we  can  now 
understand  all  his  ways  or  not.  Now,  he  says  to  all, 
"  Come ;  "  but  he  will  not  eternally  say  it.  And  when  he 
shall  say,  "  Depart,"  it  will  be  right,  because  "  the  Lord 
God  hath  said  it."  This  is  an  overwhelming  thought,  I 
know ;  and  I  am  willing  my  friend  should  make  all  of  it 
he  can.  Let  him  multiply  his  boisterous  and  horrific 
exclamations.  They  who  are  not  obeying  the  Lord,  and 
do  not  mean  to,  need  be  most  alarmed,  and  the  sooner 
such  are  aroused  from  slumber  the  better. 

We  are  not  done  with  the  passage  in  Revelations  yet 
— "  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still."  The  Sav- 
ior added,  "  Behold,  I  come  quickly,  and  my  reward  is 
with  me,  to  give  every  man  according  as  his  work  shall 
be."  I  have  said  what  I  have  to  say  about  "  quickly  " 
and  "  at  hand."  My  friend  thinks  these  words  make  it 
certain  that  the  fulfillment  of  all  that  is  here  spoken  was 
only  a  few  days,  or  years  at  most,  in  the  future.  I  have 
tried  to  get  him  to  say  when  it  was  fulfilled.  He  is  too 
cautious  for  that.     True,  he  has  said  the  whole  passage 


Universal  Salvation.  14V 

"refers  to  the  rejection  of  the  Jewish   nation;"  but  I 
sho^ved  that  the  Jewish  nation,  as  such,  had  been  rejected 
and  put  upon  "an  equahty  with  all  other  nations"  fifty 
years  before  these  words  were  spoken.     Even  Jerusalem 
had  been  destroyed,  agreeably  to  our  best  chronological 
calculations,  at  least  twenty  years  before.     Hence  my 
friend's  extreme  caution.     Now,  I  wish  to  call  attention 
to  what  follows  the  words,  "Behold,  I  come  quickly." 
I  he  Lord  adds,  "and  my  reward   is  with  me,  to  -ive 
eveiy  man  according  as  his  work  shall  be."     Is  all   this 
fulfilled  ?     Has  "  every  man  »  been  rewarded  accordino-  to 
his  work   for  nearly  eighteen  hundred  years.?     I    thtnk 
not.     But  further,  the  Lord  adds,  "I  am  Alpha   and 
Omega,  the  beginning  and  the  end,   the  first  and   the 
last."      Was  he  only  the  "Alpha  and  the  Omega,  the 
beginning  and  the  end,  the  first  and  the  last,"  of  the 
Jewish  nation?     Christ  refers  to  himself  as  "the  etid'^ 
in   connection  with  his  coming,  and  the  rewarding  of 
every  man,  and  the  time  when  it  shall  be  said  — "He 
that  is  filthy,  let  him   be  filthy  still."     Of  what  is  the 
"  end,"  pray .?     Only  of  the  Jewish  nation .? 

Note  this  fiict  also;  that  notwithstanding  it  is  said  in 
the  first  verse  of  this  book  of  Revelations  that  the  thinc^s 
herein  revealed  "must  shortly  come  to  pass,"  yet  my 
friend  himself  does  not  believe  that  they  have  all  come 
to  pass  yet.  I  fail  to  get  his  attention  to  his  own  view 
of  this  book,  and  to  the  meaning  of  '' shortly ." 

I  have  not  said  that  "let"  means  "shall,"  or  that 
"still"  means  " endless."  The  gentleman's  confusion  is 
so  deep  that  he  has  forgotten  the  purpose  for  which  I 
called  up  this  passage.  It  was  simply  to  show  that  he 
was  wrong  when  he  quoted  the  words,  "  the  Spirit  and 
the  bride  say,  'Come,'"  etc.,  and  assumed  that  the  Spirit 


148  Oral  Discussion. 

and  the  bride  would  "  e/cr^a/Zy  say,  Come."  And  the 
passage  senses  the  pui'pose  exactly  for  -which  I  quoted  it. 

The  gentleman  says  that  even  the  rich  man  had  the 
power  of  choice,  after  death.  "  He  chose  to  have  his 
tongue  cooled."  But  did  he  get  it  "cooled".?  "He 
prayed  " — "  His  hell  was  a  place  of  prayer."  But  was 
his  prayer  answered?  It  seems  to  me  he  found  his 
power  of  choosing  good  or  evil  somewhat  restrained. 
But  my  friend  asks,  with  an  air  of  triumph,  "what  was 
the  devil  about,  to  allow  one  of  his  subjects  to  pray } " 
I  suppose  the  devil  concerns  himself  very  little  about  the 
prayers  of  his  subjects  after  it  is  too  late  for  praying  to 
do  them  any  good,  as  in  the  case  of  the  rich  man. 

XV.  Affirmant's  fifteenth  argument  is  based  on  the 
"  Promises  of  God." 

Before  quoting  quite  a  catalogue  of  passages,  he  told  us 
Peter  asserted  that  "  the  restitution  of  all  things  was 
spoken  by  all  God's  holy  prophets  since  the  world 
began."  Peter  never  asserted  that.  The  gentleman 
will  have  to  put  on  clear  glasses.  There  is  almost  an 
infinite  diflfcrence  between  what  Peter  said,  and  what 
the  gentleman  represented  him  as  saying. 

Then  we  were  referred  to  Gen.  xii.  3,  xviii.  17,  18, 
xxii.  18,  xxvi.  3,  4,  xxviii.  14.  The  first  passage  reads 
thus:  "And  in  thee  all  families  of  the  earth  shall  be 
blessed."  This  was  God's  promise  to  Abraham ;  it  was 
renewed  to  Isaac  and  Jacob,  and  is  fulfilled  in  the  Gos- 
pel, by  which  salvation  is  offered  to  all  nations,  instead 
of  to  Jews  only.  But  my  friend's  proposition  cuts  him 
off  from  all  these  promises.  He  has  made  a  bold  move- 
ment in  affirming  that  "  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful 
will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved,"  but  has 
given  up  the  great  reservoir  of  Universalist  argument — 


Universal  Salvation. 


149 


the  "  absolute  promises."  All  these  promises  refer  to  "  na- 
tions," "•kindreds,"  and  "families  of  the  earth;"  while 
his  proposition  refers  to  such  as  "  leave  this  world  sin- 
ful," and  go  from  the  "  earth,"  go  where  there  are  no 
"nations,"  no  "kindreds,"  no  "families,"  go  into  the 
eternal  world.  A  blessing  promised  to  "  the  nations  of 
tlie  earth "  may  not  reach  one  who  has  gone  into  the 
eternal  world  sinful.  My  friend  will  have  to  tell  where 
those  go  "  who  leave  this  world  sinful,"  and  then  show 
that  that  place,  wherever  it  is,  comes  within  the  scope  of 
the  promises.     This  he  cannot  do. 

The  gentleman  says  this  promise  made  to  Abraham 
"includes  the  resurrection."  This  brings  up  the  impor- 
tant question  again,  ivhat  Is  the  resurrection?  The 
gentleman  should  answer.  With  my  view  of  the  resur- 
rection, it  matters  not  if  this  promise  does  "  include  the 
resurrection."  My  view  of  the  resuiTection  does  not 
involve  the  reconciliation  and  salvation  of  all  men.  I 
believe  in  the  "  resurrection  both  of  the  just  and  the 
unjust" — some  will  come  forth  "to  life,"  and  some  "  to 
condemnation ; "  "  every  man  in  his  own  order." 

I  know  the  blessing  promised  to  Abraham,  in  Christ, 
is  universal — in  that  it  was  promised,  not  merely  to  Jews, 
or  any  other  one  branch  of  the  human  family,  but  to  all 
nations.  Agreed,  that  that  promise  contains  the  salva- 
tion of  the  Gospel.  But  now  I  have  two  questions  for 
the  gentleman.  i.  Is  that  salvation  conditional  or 
unconditional.''  2.  Is  man,  or  is  he  not,  free  to  comply 
with  the  conditions  as  he  may  choose.''  My  position 
here  is  unequivocal.  As  the  gentleman's  argument 
depends  upon  his  answer,  he  is  logically  bound  to 
make  an  unequivocal  answer.  I  affirm,  and  if  I  can 
prove  anything,  I  can  prove,  that  the  individual  and  per- 


150  Oral  Discussion. 

sonal  enjoyment  of  any  blessing  God  has  ever  promised 
to  men,  is  conditioned  upon  obedience.  It  matters  not 
whether  any  condition  is  expressed  in  connection  with  a 
promise  or  not;  it  can  be  shown  that  such  promise  is, 
nevertheless,  conditional.  Then  I  say  with  Mr.  Ballou, 
that  if  salvation  is  conditional,  it  must  be  in  tlie  power 
of  men  to  neglect  the  conditions  thereof;  and  that  to 
deny  this  is  a  logical  abnegation  of  those  conditions, 
and,  in  effect,  the  destruction  of  their  nature.  Mr.  Man- 
ford  must  be  a  consistent  Universalist,  or,  logically, 
cannot  be  one  at  all.  He  must  say  salvation  is  abso- 
lutely unconditional,  or  he  must  concede  that  if  all  men 
shall  ever  be  saved,  it  is  not  susceptible  of  proof  in  ad- 
vance. He  must  fall  back  behind  the  old  earth  works 
thrown  up  by  Mr.  Ballou  and  others  —  tinconditiojtal 
salvation — or  he  will  certainly,  to  use  his  own  jDhrase,  be 
"gobbled  up."  Universalism  can  only  be  defended 
upon  the  ground  that  God  has  absolutely  decreed  the 
salvation  of  all  men,  without  any  regard  to  voluntary 
faitii  and  obedience  upon  their  part;  and  Mr.  Manford, 
it  seems,  has  found  that  this  ground  is  untenable. 
\Time  expired. 

[mr.  manford's  sixth  speech.] 

\  My  worthy  friend  complains  that  I  associate  him  with 
the  great  man  of  his  church,  Mr.  Campbell,  in  his  doc- 
trine of  the  moral  depravity  and  sinfulness  of  mankind 
by  nature;  and  says  I  should  be  manly  enough  "to  be 
done  with  infant  damnation,"  as  he  does  not  believe  in 
it.  I  have  not  asserted,  that  either  of  them  believed  in 
infant  damnation,  but  that  Mr.  Campbell  advocated 
infant  sinfulness ;  and  as  he  denied  infant  regenei-ation 


Universal  Salvation.  151 

in  time  and  eternity,  infant  damnation  follows  as  surely 
as  two  and  two  make  four.  That  is  what  I  said.  And 
as  Mr.  Sweeney  had  not  denied  subscribing  to  Mr.  C.'s 
view,  I  supposed  he  agreed  with  him,  as  they  both  be- 
long to  one  church.  When  he  quoted  from  "  Ballou  on 
the  Atonement,"  I  stated  distinctly  I  was  not  bound  to 
subscribe  to  what  he  or  any  other  man  wrote  or  uttered, 
and  did  not  assent  to  what  Mr.  B.  seemed  to  mean  in 
the  quotation.  If  Mr.  Sweeney  had  as  frankly  stated 
he  did  not  subscribe  to  Mr.  Campbell's  view  of  human 
nature  I  should  have  dropped  the  subject.  But  he  did 
not,  and  has  not  yet  done  that,  but  rather  defends  Mr. 
Campbell's  views,  says  I  misrepresent  them,  and  wants 
to  know  why  I  do  not  produce  the  book  I  quote  from. 
I  have  the  book  with  me,  and  have  named  the  pages 
where  the  quotations  can  be  found.  But  Mr.  C.  is  not 
the  only  one  in  his  church  who  believes  in  infant  deprav- 
ity. It  seems  to  be  the  general  sentiment  of  the  church. 
The  Apostolic  Times,  of  Lexington,  Ky.,  edited  by  five 
of  the  leading  ministers  of  the  denomination,  adopts  the 
same  view  of  human  nature.  In  an  editorial,  I  find  the 
following :  "  When  Adam  sinned,  his  sin  corrupted  his 
nature,  his  whole  nature.  This  all  concede.  By  his  na- 
ture we  mean  his  flesh  and  his  spirit^  and  we  allow  that 
these  two  terms  exhaust  his  nature ;  for  had  God  annihilat- 
ed his  flesh  and  extinguished  his  spirit,  there  would  have 
been  none  of  the  man  left.  Now  all  we  inherit  from 
Adam,  we  inherit  from  him  since  the  coiTuption  of  his 
nature  set  in.  How  much  do  we  inherit?  We  inherit  a 
body  certainly.  Do  we  inherit  also  a  spirit  ?  "  According 
to  this  we  inherit  a  corrupt  body  and  corrupt  spirit  from 
Adam — our  "  whole  nature  "  is  corrupt.  Now,  they  all 
contend   that   children   cannot   be   regenerated   in   this 


152 


Oral   Discussion. 


world,  and  so  if  they  are  saved  in  eternity,  they  must  be 
regenerated  in  eternity.  If  this  is  so,  then  one-third  of 
mankind  are  saved  who  "  leave  this  world  sinful,"  leave 
it  with  a  "  sinful  nature,"  as  Mr,  Campbell  says,  and  a 
"  corrupt  spirit,"  as  these  five  leading  men  say.  They 
must  be  regenerated  somewhere,  for  "  sinful  natures," 
"  coiTupt  spirits,"  do  not  enter  heaven.  Please  enlighten 
us  here. 

"Will  any  be  saved  who  leave  this  world  sinful.'*'* 
The  gentleman  tells  us  frankly  that  he  don't  know. 
That  is  honest.  Why,  then,  does  the  man  deny  the 
truth  of  my  proposition,  which  affirms  that  those  who 
die  sinful  will  finally  be  saved.?  He  candidly  admits, 
that  he  does  not  know  but  that  persons  dying  sinful  will 
be  saved.  He  asserts,  that  God  has  not  revealed  that 
any  will  be  saved  who  die  sinful.  He  also  tell  us  on 
what  conditions  we  can  be  saved  from  sin,  and  one  of 
them  is  baptism.  All  who  are  immersed  are  pardoned, 
and  all  who  are  not  immersed  are  not  pardoned.  Tho'se, 
then,  who  die  unimmersed  die  in  sin,  and  he  does  not 
know  what  becomes  of  them — does  not  know  whether 
they  are  saved  or  damned — and  nearly  all  mankind  die 
without  immersion.  About  all  of  the  gentleman's  the- 
ology is  packed  into  three  words — /  donH  know.  When 
Methodists,  Presbyterians,  or  Catholics,  die — when  any 
of  any  denomination,  or  of  no  denomination,  die  without 
immersion,  he  has  to  say,  /  doiit  know  whether  they 
have  gone  to  heaven  or  hell,  to  God  or  the  devil.  And 
this  dreadful  uncertainty,  this  awful  suspense,  he  calls — ■ 
what  does  he  call  it.''  He  has  not  as  much  faith  as  a 
grain  of  mustard  seed.  He  does  not  know  but  they  are 
all  saved;  he  does  not  know  but  they  are  all  damned. 
He  stands  between  belief  and  unbelief. 


Universal  Salvation. 


153 


My  friend  asks  several  questions  about  the  fate  of  cer- 
tain sectarian  "crafts"  and  their  crews,  and  I  will  give 
him  the  information  wanted  in  the  words  of  the  apostle 
Paul :  "  According  to  the  grace  of  God  which  is  given 
unto  me,  as  a  wise  master-builder,  I  have  laid  the  founda- 
tion, and  another  buildeth  thereon.  But  let  every  man 
take  heed  how  he  buildeth  thereupon.  For  other  founda- 
tion can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus 
Christ.  Now  if  any  man  build  upon  this  foundation, 
gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble;  every 
man's  work  shall  be  made  manifest :  for  the  day  shall 
declare  it,  because  it  shall  be  revealed  by  fire ;  and  the 
fire  shall  try  every  man's  work,  of  what  sort  it  is.  If 
any  man's  work  abide  which  he  hath  built  thereupon, 
he  shall  receive  a  reward.  If  any  man's  work  shall  be 
burned,  he  shall  suffer  loss:  but  he  himself  shall  be 
saved;  yet  so  as  by  fire,     i  Cor.  iii.  10-15. 

The  gentleman  thinks  it  is  "wretchedly  licentious,"  to 
assert  that  salvation  can  be  easier  effected  after  leaving 
the  corruptions  of  earth,  and  entering  the  spirit-land. 
Pagans  and  Jews  doubtless,  thought  it  was  "  wretchedly 
licentious "  for  the  apostles  to  teach  that  it  would  be 
easier  for  them  to  be  better  men  and  women  in  the 
Christian  church,  than  in  Judaism  or  Paganism !  How 
*'  wretchedly  licentious"  the  great  apostle  wrote,  "  But 
now  hath  he  obtained  a  more  excellent  ministry^  by  how 
much  also  he  is  the  mediator  of  a  better  covenant^ 
which  was  established  upon  better  protnises  "  !  Heb. 
viii.  6.  Giving  them  "  a  moi'e  excellent  ministiy,"  "  a 
better  covenant,"  and  "better  promises,"  was  just  as 
"Ucentious"  in  the  estimation  of  the  Jews,  as  the  Gospel 
promise,  that  the  time  would  come  when  "  they  shall 
be  all  taught    of   God,"  (John    vi.    45),    is,    in    Mr. 


1 54  Oral  Discussion. 

Sweeney's  estimation.  How  "wretchedly  licentious" 
parents  are,  when,  finding  that  their  children  are 
learning  more  evil  than  good,  they  transfer  them  to 
a  better  school  where  it  is  easier  to  train  them 
in  wisdom's  ways!  How  "  wretchedly  licentious "  our 
"  School  Boards  "  are,  to  put  books  in  our  schools  that 
the  pupils  may  easier  acquire  knowledge!  How 
"  wretchedly  licentious  "  parents  are,  when,  finding  that 
their  neighborhood  is  demoralizing  their  family,  they  move 
to  a  more  virtuous  locality,  that  their  children  may  be 
more  easily  trained  to  virtuous  habits !  If  it  is  "  wretch- 
edly licentious "  to  teach,  that  the  good  Father  above 
will  transfer  men  to  a  world  where  the  surroundings  and 
influences  are  more  divine  and  potent  than  those  of 
earth,  then  it  is  equally  as  "  licentious  "  to  improve  our 
places  and  circumstances  in  this  world  with  a  view  to 
amendment. 

But  the  gentleman  can  see  nothing  "  wretchedly  licen- 
tious" in  putting  youths  and  maidens,  all  the  hard- 
ened criminals  from  earth,  old  and  young,  and  fiends 
from  the  pit,  into  hell,  where  they  will  be  compelled  to 
live  together,  night  and  day,  age  in  and  age  out.  He 
can  see  nothing  but  -purity^  love  and  wisdom  in  such  an 
arrangement.  In  my  judgment,  all  the  immoralities  of 
earth — all  its  vices,  from  the  first  to  the  last,  are  but  a 
^;'<9/ compared  to  the  "wretched  licentiousness"  of  such 
a  disposition  of  mankind.  And  then,  to  cap  the  climax, 
it  is  said  that  the  God  of  heaven  is  the  builder  and 
owner  of  that  infernal  place,  and  will  keep  it  running 
forever.  No  decent  man  will  rent  his  property  for  rum 
holes,  gambling  dens,  or  places  of  prostitution,  and 
yet  our  Heavenly  Father  is  charged  with  keeping  up  an 
institution  where  every  crime  known  on  earth,or  in  hell, 


Universal  Salvation.  155 

by  men,  fiends  or  devils,  will  be  legalized  —  legalized 
by  Him  who  is  so  pure  that  even  heaven  is  imperfect  in 
his  sight.  Talk  about  "  wretchedly  licentious  "  doc- 
trines! All  other  abominations  are  pale  as  death  com- 
pared to  this. 

The  gentleman  talks  about  dispensations.  When 
youths  and  maidens,  old  and  young,  little  sinners  and 
big  sinners,  shall  all  be  shut  up  in  hell  together,  where  it 
shall  no  longer  be  their  duty  or  privilege  to  obey  God — 
so  the  gentleman  says — then  a  new  dispensation  will 
commence.  Yes,  it  will  be  a  new  dispensation  —  a  dis- 
pensation in  which  there  will  be  no  God,  no  Christ,  no 
angels,  no  saints.  They  will  all  be  dead  or  transformed 
into  fiends.  "Wretched  licentiousness"  will  be  rampant 
in  hell  and  heaven,  for  such  an  infernal  cesspit  would 
corrupt  the  whole  universe. 

The  Mosaic  dispensation  has  closed;  the  Christian 
dispensation  will  end,  but  the  dispensation  of  Love, 
Mercy,  Justice,  Purity,  Forgiveness,  will  end  only  when 
God  ends.  The  Mosaic  and  Christian  dispensations  are 
only  two  seconds  of  the  Dispensation  of  God.  The  dis- 
pensation of  Love  and  Mercy,  of  Life  and  Immortality, 
are  eternal  and  universal. 

Only  a  few  words  on  the  gentleman's  last  on  Revela 
tion.  If  "at  hand"  means  not  at  hand,  if  "quickly" 
means  «t»/ quickly,  if  "let"  means  5//a//,  if  "still"  means 
endless,  then  there  is  to  be  the  dispensation  of  "filthi- 
ness  "  he  believes  in ;  but  if  the  Lord  means  exactly  what 
he  says,  then  said  dispensation  is  only  the  dream  of  some 
midnight  reveler.  He  makes  an  awful  blunder  about 
the  date  of  Revelation.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  and  many 
other  critics,  place  it  before  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish 
state,  and  from  chapter  eleven  we  learn  that  the  temple 
was  standing  when  the  book  was  written. 


156  Oral  Discussion. 

Next  comes  his  comments  on  the  glorious  Promise  to 
the  fathers.  "But  now,"  says  he,  "I  have  two  questions 
for  the  gentleman,  i.  Is  that  salvation  conditional  or 
unconditional?"  I  answer,  directly,  part  of  it  is  condi- 
tional, and  part  unconditional.  "  2.  Is  man,  or  is  he 
not,  free  to  comply  with  the  conditions  as  he  may 
choose?"  Of  course  he  is.  I  will  now  notice  his  com- 
ments. He  admits  the  Promise  is  universal — that  all 
nations,  all  families,  all  kindreds,  mean  all  mankind. 
Veiy  good.  Now  I  have  a  question  to  ask,  will  there 
be  any  in  eternity,  any  who  "  leave  this  world  sinful," 
who  did  not  belong  to  some  nation,  some  family,  were 
not  of  some  kindred?  Will  he  answer?  Of  course  he 
will  reply,  that  they  all  sustained  those  relations.  Well, 
then,  the  promise  is,  that  they  shall  all  be  blessed  — 
blessed  in  Christ — blessed  by  being  raised  from  the  dead. 
The  devil  is  welcome  to  all  he  can  get,  that  belong  to 
no  nation,  no  family,  and  are  not  a  kindred.  But  the 
gentleman  says,  my  proposition  includes  those  "who 
leave  this  world."  Of  course  it  does,  and  all  "who 
leave  this  world"  did  belong  to  some  nation,  some  fam- 
ily, etc.  He  admits  that  the  promise  includes  the  resur- 
rection, but  says,  some  will  be  raised  to  condemnation — 
he  means  endless  damnation.  Now,  would  that  be  a 
BLESSING?  Will  he  answer?  I  repeav^vrll  he  answer? 
/If  irwould  not  be  a  blessing  none  will  be  raised  in  that 
I  condition,  for  all  who  belong  to  a  nation,  family,  etc., 
\are  to  be  blessed  by  being  raised  from  the  DEADi" 
Being  blessed  by  being  raised  from  the  dead  is  uncondi- 
tional, but  our  condition  in  that  blessed  world  into  which 
the  blessed  resurrection  will  introduce  us,  will  be  modi- 
fied by  the  way  this  life  is  spent.  But  it  will  be  a 
blessed  world  to  all,  a  blessed  resurrection  to  all. 


Universal  Salvation. 


157 


XVI.  The  same  promise  of  "the  restitution  of  all 
things,"  is  again  spoken  of  thus,  "  All  nations  whom  thou 
hast  made  shall  come  and  worship  before  thee,  O  Lord, 
and  shall  glorify  thy  name,"  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  9.  All  nations 
whom  God  has  made,  do  not  surely  mean  some  of  them. 
And  when  it  is  said,  they  shall  come  and  worship  before 
God,  it  cannot  mean  that  multitudes  will  be  driven  fro?n 
him  down  to  eternal  destruction.  Long  since  men  and 
women  began  to  go  and  worship  before  God  and  glorify 
his  name.  The  company  was  then  small,  but  it  has 
been  increasing  ever  since.  They  have  been  falling  in 
from  the  east  and  the  west,  from  the  north  and  the 
south,  from  the  valley  and  the  mountain,  from  the  prairie 
and  the  forest,  from  the  city  and  the  country,  from  the 
isle  and  the  continent;  and  they  will  continue  to  fall  in 
till  finally  all  nations  xuho7?i  God  has  niade  will  join  the 
heaven-bound  throng,  and  go  and  worship  him  and 
glorify  his  name.  In  the  words  of  the  immortal  Mil- 
ton— 

"The  nations  all  whom  thou  hast  made 

Shall  come,  and  all  shall  frame 
To  bow  them  low  before  thee,  Lord, 

And  glorify  thy  name." 

Each  must  go  for  himself.  I  cannot  go  for  you,  you 
cannot  for  me,  and  heaven  does  nothing  for  us  we  should 
do  ourselves.  All  have  a  work  to  do,  now  and  forever. 
God  works,  and  we  must  work.  "  Work  out  your  own 
salvation  with  fear  and  trembling,  for  it  is  God  which 
worketh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good 
pleasure."  Phil.  ii.  12,  13.  He  is  now  working  in  all 
souls,  that  they  may  work  to  do  his  will  and  good  pleas- 
ure, and  he  will  continue  to  work  till  all  "come  and 
worship  before  him  and  glorify  his  name." 


158  Oral  Discussion. 

"  How  long,  dear  Savior,  O  how  long 

Shill  this  bright  hour  delay  ? 
Fly  swiftly  round,  ye  wheels  of  time, 

And  bring  the  welcome  day." 

XVII.  All  will  finally  partake  of  the  heavenly  feast 
and  live.  "In  this  mountain  shall  the  Lord  of  hosts 
make  unto  all  people  a  feast  of  fat  things,  of  wine  on 
the  lees  well  refined.  And  he  will  destroy  in  this  moun- 
tain the  face  of  the  covering  cast  over  all  people^  and 
the  veil  that  is  spread  over  all  nations.  He  will  swal- 
low up  death  in  victory.  And  the  Lord  God  will  wipe 
away  the  tears  from  off'  all  faces ;  and  the  rebuke  of  his 
people  shall  be  taken  away  from  off'  all  the  earth.  For 
the  mouth  of  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it.  *  *  *  For 
in  this  mountain  shall  the  hand  of  the  Lord  rest,  and 
Moab  shall  be  trodden  down  for  the  dunghill,  *  *  * 
and  the  fortress  of  the  high  fort  of  the  walls  shall  he 
bring  down,  lay  low,  and  bring  to  the  ground,  even  to 
the  dust."  Isa.  xxv.  6-13.  In  this  important  passage 
universal  destruction^!  and  universal  salvation  are 
clearly  taught.  The  "covering"  and  the  "veil"  are 
to  be  destroyed  from  all  people.,  "death  swallowed 
up  in  victory,"  and  "tears  wiped  away  from  off'  all 
faces."  Error  and  sin,  death  and  tears,  then,  are 
to  be  abolished,  destroyed.  Clearly,  the  prophet 
teaches  the  entire,  universal  destruction  of  evils. 
The  same  is  taught  by  other  terms  in  the  passage.  Moab 
typifies  sin  and  wrong.  It  is  to  be  destroyed,  brought 
"down,"  "laid  low,"  "even  to  the  dust."  And  in  first 
Corinthians,  fifteenth  chapter,  where  the  apostle  is  writ- 
ing of  "the  end"  of  Chrisfs  reign,  he  conveys  the  same 
truth  when  he  says,  "  Then  cometh  the  end,  when  Christ 
shall  have  delivered  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the 


Universal  Salvation.  159 

Father,  when  he  shall  have  put  down  all  rule^  and 
authority^  and  foiver.  For  he  must  reign  till  he  hath 
put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.  The  last  enemy  shall 
he  destroyed — death."  "Rule,"  "authority,"  "power," 
"death,"  "enemies,"  mean  the  same  as  "Moab,"  "veil," 
"covering,"  "tears,"  and  "death,"  in  Isaiah's  prophecy. 
They  are  all  to  be  destroyed.  That  both  passages  refer 
to  the  same  consummation  there  cannot  be  a  reasonable 
doubt,  for  in  that  same  chapter  in  Corinthians  the  apostle 
cites  the  passage  in  Isaiah  I  have  just  quoted,  and  says 
it  shall  then,  at  the  resurrection,  be  fulfilled.  "Then 
shall  be  brought  to  pass  the  saying  that  is  written, 
'  Death  is  swallowed  tip  in  victory^  "  John  the  Baptist 
referred  to  the  same  destruction  of  evil,  when  he  pointed 
to  the  Savior  and  said,  "  Behold,  the  Lamb  of  God, 
which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  And  Jesus 
to  the  same,  when  he  said,  '•'•Every  plant  which  my 
Heavenly  Father  hath  not  planted  shall  be  rooted  up." 
And  the  prophet  Daniel,  when  speaking  of  the  work  of 
the  coming  Messiah,  said,  he  shall  '•'•Finish  the  trans- 
gressiofz,  make  an  end  of  sin."  Certainly  all  sin,  suffer- 
ing and  death  are  to  be  annihilated. 

But  the  salvation  of  mankind  is  also  taught  by  Isaiah. 
The  feast  is  made  for  all  people.  And  all  people  will 
partake  of  it,  for  the  veil  and  covering  are  to  be  removed 
from  all  eyes  and  faces,  all  will  see  the  truth,  and  rejoice 
in  the  truth,  death  give  way  to  life  immortal,  and  tears 
of  son-ow  and  suffering  be  known  no  more,  forever. 
Yes,  this  glorious  passage  clearly  teaches  the  universal 
destruction  of  evil,  and  the  universal  salvation  of  man. 

XVIII.     My  friend  wants  to  know  where  men  go  to  -v 
when  they  leave  this  world.     I  will  answer  in  Bible     j 
language,  and  that  is  my  eighteenth  argumetit.     "  Thert  J 


i6o  Oral  Discussion. 

shall  the  dust  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was ;  and  the 

SPIRIT     SHALL     RETURN     UNTO     GOD     WHO     GAVE      IT." 

Eccl.  xii.  7-  Jesus,  who  came  from  God,  also  answers 
the  question.  "And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth, 
WILL  DRAW  ALL  MEN  TO  ME."  John  xii.  33.  The 
great  apostle,  who  had  a  view  of  the  third  heaven,  is 
competent  to  answer  that  question.  "  For  of  him,  and 
through  him,  and  to  him  are  all  things."  Rom  xi. 
36.  The  gentleman's  important  question  is  answered  by 
three  \\'itnesses,  and  is  it  not  complete.'' 

XIX.  "  Look  unto  me  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends 
of  the  earth;  for  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else," 
How  many  will  look  unto  God,  and  be  saved?  Some  or 
■part  ?  My  friend  says  part.  Now  see  what  the  Lord 
says.  The  next  verse  reads  thus:  "I  have  sworn  by 
myself,  the  word  is  gone  out  of  my  mouth  in  righteous- 
ness, and  shall  not  return.  That  unto  me  every  knee 

SHALL  BOW,  EVERY  TONGUE  SHALL  SWEAR.       Surely  One 

shall  say,  In  the  Lord  have  I  righteousness  and 
strength;  even  to  him  shall  men  come;  and  all  that 
are  incensed  against  him  shall  be  ashamed.  In  the  Lord 
shall  all  the  seed  of  Israel  be  justified,  and  shall  glory." 
Isa.  xlv.  32-35.  ^^  have,  then,  the  oath  of  the  Al- 
mighty that  all  shall  look  unto  him  and  be  saved.  The 
"  seed  of  Israel  shall  be  justified ; "  "  all  that  are  incensed 
against  him  shall  be  ashamed "  of  their  sins,  and  go  and 
bow  before  the  Lord,  and  every  tongue  will  swear  that 
"  In  the  Lord  have  I  righteousness  and  strength^  Sub- 
lime woi'ds.  Blessed  be  God  for  them,  and  let  all  the 
world  say,  Amen. 

XX.  My  brother  wants  to  be  enlightened  concerning 
the  resurrection.  Surely  he  needs  enlightenment.  He 
desires  to  understand  i  Cor.  xv.     It  is  a  splendid  chap- 


Universal  Salvation.  i6i 

ter,  and  I  will  point  out  some  of  its  beauties.  "  As  in 
Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive." 
Here  are  three  truths — i.  All  died  in  Adam;  2.  All 
shall  be  made  alive;  3.  All  shall  be  made  alive  in 
Christ.  These  are  universal  truths  —  all  die,  all  shall 
live  again — all  shall  be  in  Christ.  There  is  no  immor- 
tal resurrection  out  of  Christy  for  he  is  the  resurrection 
and  the  life.  As  sure  as  all  now  have  the  Adam- 
nature,  all  then  will  have  the  Christ-nature.  The  scale 
is  even — even  so — as  much  on  one  side  as  the  other.  He 
then  explains  what  he  means  by  the  heavenly  nature.  "  So 
also  is  the  resurrection  of  the  dead" — all  the  dead.  "  It 
is  sown  in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in  incorruption.  It  is 
sown  in  dishonor,  it  is  raised  in  glory ;  it  is  sown  in 
weakness,  it  is  raised  i}t  power.  It  is  sown  a  natural 
body,  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body."  All  sow  in 
weakness,  coiTuption,  dishonor,  that  is,  all  die  in  Adam. 
All  shall  be  raised  in  poxver,  in  incorruption^  g^o^y-,  that 
is,  all  shall  be  made  alive  in  Christ.  But  not  all  equally 
glorious.  Some  like  the  great  sun,  some  like  the  little 
stars,  the  apostle  speaks  of  in  that  chapter.  All  will  be 
"  in  Christ,"  but  some^babes  in  Christ,  others  perfect  men 
in"(^rist.  This  will  result  from  men  being  free  agents, 
and  salvation  in  part  conditional. 

"But  every  man  in  his  own  order."  Mark,  every 
man.  He  still  writes  of  every  man.  "  Christ  the^rst 
fruits;  afterwards  they  that  are  Christ's  at  his  coming." 
He  speaks  of  no  other  order,  and  he  says,  every  jnan 
shall  be  in  one  of  them.  Christ  was  the  first,  and  the  bal- 
ance of  every  man  in  the  second.  When  all  who  die  in 
Adam  shall  be  in  Christ,  they  will  be  Christ's  saved, 
redeemed,  blessed.  "As  in  Adam  all  die"  includes  the 
same  as  "all  nations,"  "all  families,"  "all  kindreds."- 
14 


/ 


1 62  Oral  Disctisaion. 

■  All  are  to  be  blessed  by  being  raised  in  Christ,  and  that 
is  the  Gospel. 

"Then  cometh  the  end,  when  he  shall  have  delivered 
up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father ;  w^hen  he  shall 
have  put  down  all  rule^  and  all  authority,  and  all  power^ 
For  he  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his 
feet.  And  the  last  enemy  shall  be  destroyed  —  death." 
'  Here  he  writes  about  putting  down,  destroying  the  e7ze- 
7nies,  and  he  names  them.  i.  All  rule;  2.  All  author- 
ity; 3.  All  power;  4.  Death.  Mark  you,  man  is  not  in 
the  catalogue  of  destruction ;  he  is  in  the  catalogue  of 
life  in  Christ — all  will  be  made  alive  in  Christ.  Here  is 
universal  destruction,  and  universal  salvation.  All  rule, 
power,  authority,  inimical  to  man's  welfare,  and 
God's  glory,  shall  be  abolished,  and  "every  man"  made 
alive  in  Christ.  Death  is  the  last  enemy,  and  even  that 
is  to  be  destroyed.  All  the  enemies  referred  to  there, 
will  share  tlie  fate  of  death — be  a^inihilated.  And  if 
any  of  those  enemies  means  men,  they  will  be  annihila- 
ted, and  Annihilationism  is  true  —  not  endless  misery. 
True,  the  Bible  calls  wicked  men  enemies;  but  Christ 
loves  them,  and  God  loves  them,  and  Jesus  came  to  save 
them — not  to  torment  them  eternally — and  he  will  con- 
vert all  such  enemies  into  his  friends ;  hence  we  are  told 
to  love  our  enemies,  that  we  may  imitate  God. 

The  apostle  continues,  "For  he  hath  put  all  things 
under  his  feet.  But  when  he  saith  all  things  are  put 
under  him,  it  is  manifest  that  he  is  excepted  which  did 
put  all  things  under  him.  And  when  all  things  shall  be 
subdued  unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  be 
subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things  under  him,  that  God 
may  be  all  in  all."  This  is  the  consummation,  the 
end.     And  it  will  be  a  glorious  consummation,  a  glori- 


Universal  Salvation.  163 

ous  end.  Husbands  and  wives,  brothers  and  sisters, 
parents  and  children,  will  not  be  divided — some  sent  to 
heaven,  and  some  sent  to  hell — but  all  nations,  families, 
kindreds,  all  people,  all  who  die  in  Adam,  will  be  blessed 
in  Christ,  and  God  all  in  all.     \Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  sixth  reply.] 

My  opponent  seems  still  disposed  to  spend  a  large 
share  of  his  time  trying  to  impress  you  that  the  teaching 
of  my  brethren  involves  the  damnation  of  infants.  He 
stops  not  at  misrepresenting  the  great  and  honored 
dead,  but  in  his  last  most  grossly  misrepi-esents  the 
editors  of  the  Apostolic  Times.  The  extract  he  read 
from  that  paper  does  not  teach  what  he  said.  It  says 
we  inherit  a  corrupt  body  from  Adam,  but  does  not  say 
we  inherit  a  corrupt  spirit  from  him.  When,  therefore, 
the  gentleman  says,  "according  to  this" — meaning  the 
the  extract  he  read  from  tlie  Times — "we  inherit  a 
corrupt  body  and  a  corrupt  spirit  from  Adam,"  he  sim- 
ply misrepresents  the  Times'  editors.  I  do  not  believe 
that  one  of  those  editors  entertains  such  a  sentiment. 
I  know  some  of  them  do  not.  He  misunderstands 
them,  and  misrepresents  them,  as  he  does  Mr.  Campbell 
on  the  same  subject,  and  as  he  does  the  scriptures  gener- 
ally in  this  discussion.  Indeed  it  seems  to  be  a  weakness 
with  him,  to  quote  an  author,  or  his  opponent,  and  then 
misstate  the  import  of  the  quotation.  What  relief  it 
would  afford  the  gentleman  if  he  could  only  succeed  in 
bringing  down  infants  and  justified  persons  to  the  level 
of  unpardoned  and  unrepentant  sinners!  It  would 
mitigate   the  enormity  of  his   affirmation,  and  that  is 


164  Oral  Discussion, 

what  he  feels  it  necessaiy  to  do  in  the  judgment  of  all 
who  have  read  and  who  believe  the  Bible.  But  this  he 
cannot  do.  Infants  have  not  gone  astray,  and  christians 
are  "made  nigh  by  the  blood  of  Christ."  One  may 
cavil  about  the  weaknesses  and  imperfections  christians 
have,  I  know,  and  try  to  blot  out  the  line  between  them 
and  aliens;  but  it  cannot  be  done.  That  line  stands  out 
to  the  view  of  the  believer  in  the  Bible  as  boldly  as  the 
doctrine  of  remission  of  sins  by  the  blood  of  Chi-isL 
"  Therefore  if  any  man  be  in  Christ  he  is  a  new  creature, 
old  things  are  passed  away,  behold  all  things  are  become 
new;  and  all  things  are  of  God  who  hath  reconciled  us 
unto  hiinself,  by  Jesus  Christ."  "Who  hath  deHvered 
us  from  the  power  of  darkness,  and  hath  translated  us 
into  the  kingdom  of  his  dear  Son;  in  whom  we  have 
redemption  through  his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of 
sins."  "  If  we  walk  in  the  light,  as  he  is  in  the  light, 
we  have  fellowship  one  with  another,  and  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin."  "  I 
write  unto  you,  little  children,  because  your  sins  are  for- 
given you  for  his  name's  sake."  "  Ye  are  complete  in 
him."  These  scriptures  show  the  justified  state  of  the 
christian.  Now,  remember  that  "  all  the  promises  of 
God  are  yea  and  amen  in  Christ,"  and  that  consequently 
he  who  is  "without  Christ"  is  "without  hope  in  the 
world,"  and  the  difference  between  the  state  of  the 
christian  and  that  of  the  alien  will  appeal'.  Death,  sim- 
ply, can  never  bring  the  two  together,  morally. 

I  have  no  doubt  but  that  the  gentleman  much  prefers 
talking  about  "immersion"  to  talking  about  the  reconcili- 
ation and  salvation  of  such  as  live  and  die  "  enemies  of  the 
cross  of  Christ;  whose  end  is  destruction,  whose  God  is 
their  belly,  and  whose  glory  is  in  their  shame ; "  but  I 


Universal  Salvation.  165 

cannot  now  accommodate  him  to  a  debate  on  that  ques- 
tion. What  great  trouble  he  has  about  my  uncertainty 
as  to  the  future  of  Methodists,  Presbyterians,  and  those 
of  other  denominations !  He  thinks  all  my  theology  is 
"packed  in,  I  don't  know."  Well,  if  he  can  only  relieve 
my  fears  for  all  but  the  honest  among  the  Methodists, 
Presbyterians,  etc.,  I  will  close  the  debate  with  him. 

Next,  my  friend  reads  about  five  verses  from  the  third 
chapter  of  first  Corinthians — for  what  purpose,  who  can 
tell.''  I  suppose  it  was  for  the  sake  of  these  words:  "If 
any  man's  work  shall  be  burned,  he  shall  suffer  loss; 
but  he  himself  shall  be  saved."  Only  men's  works  are 
to  be  burned — all  men  will  be  saved.  This,  I  suppose, 
is  his  conclusion.  But  let  us  look  at  this  passage,  as  it  is 
brought  into  the  debate.  Paul  says  he  had  "laid  the 
foundation;"  and  that  that  foundation  "  is  Jesus  Christ;" 
and  he  warns  every  man  to  "  take  heed  how  he  buildeth 
thereupon."  He  likens  what  may  be  built  thereupon  to 
"gold,  silver,  precious  stones;  wood,  hay,  stubble." 
The  material  may  be  good,  better,  best;  or  bad,  worse, 
worst.  But  what  is  the  material.''  I  answer,  men  and 
women.  Peter  says:  "To  whom  [Christ,  the  founda- 
tion] coming,  as  unto  a  living  stone,  *  *  *  ye  also, 
as  lively  stones,  are  built  up  a  spiritual  house,  etc." 
1  Pet.  ii.  4,  5.  Paul  testifies  to  the  same  effect:  '•'•  Te 
are  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  pro- 
phets, Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone." 
Eph.  ii.  19,  20.  A  good  man  may  bring  bad  material 
into  this  building — may  bring  bad  people  into  the  church. 
But  "the  fire  shall  try  eveiy  man's  work  [material]  of 
what  sort  it  is,"  and  "if  any  man's  work  [material]  shall 
be  burned,  he  shall  suflTer  loss  [of  the  material  he  has 
builded   on    the   foundation],  but   he   himself  shall    be 


1 66  Oral  Discussion. 

saved."  And  as  the  gentleman  makes  "shall  be  saved" 
refer  to  the  future — final  salvation — he  thereby  refers 
"shall  be  burned"  to  the  future,  and  makes  it  final,  too, 
and  as  it  turns  out  that  "work"  refers  to  men  and  w^omen, 
instead  of  sins,  as  he  would  have  it,  the  passage  is  fatal 
to  his  proposition.     It  is  the  wrong  witness  for  him ! 

The  gentleman  tries  to  illustrate  into  our  faith  his 
*' wretchedly  licentious"  doctrine,  that  one  may  postpone 
conversion  till  he  gets  into  heaven.  As  "parents,  finding 
that  their  neighborhood  is  demoralizing  their  family, 
move  to  a  virtuous  locality  that  their  children  may  be 
more  easily  trained  to  virtuous  habits,"  so  our  Heavenly 
Father,  when  he  finds  that  the  sinner's  neighborhood 
is  demoralizing  hiin  moi"e  and  more,  moves  him  to 
heaven.,  where  his  conversion  and  training  will  not  only 
be  possible  but  infinitely  more  easily  accomplished,  than 
in  this  " demoralizing  neighborhood"!  And  of  course, 
as  the  sinner  is  taken  to  heaven  before  he  is  converted, 
he  is  taken  by  sheer  physical  force !  And  this  is  modern 
Universalism !  And,  now,  will  the  learned  gentleman 
be  kind  enough  to  tell  us  what  is  going  to  become  of 
the  "  demoralizing  neighborhood "  when  God  takes  the 
sinner  to  heaven  to  evangelize  him  ? 

Then  the  affirmant  gives  "hell,"  "the  pit,"  "that 
infernal  place,"  another  blowing  up !  I  think  that  must 
be  one  of  his  most  matured  themes.  He  never  talks  so 
glibly  as  when  he  is  talking  of  hell.  But  he  need  not 
trouble  himself  about  that  matter,  unless  he  thinks  he  is 
about  to  fail  to  prove  his  proposition.  For  if  he  suc- 
ceeds he  will  empty  all  the  hells  of  earth,  or  of  any  other 
locality,  of  all  their  men  and  devils,  into  heaven,  and  so 
make  an  end  of  all  hells.  And,  by  the  way,  all  those 
*'rum  holes,  gambling  dens,  or  places  of  prostitution," 


Universal  Salvation.  167 

of  which  he  speaks  in  unmeasured  terms  of  bitterness, 
and  which  doubtless  are  outcroppings  of  hell,  if  he  is 
rights  are  sending  men  and  women  to  heaven  with  al- 
most infinitely  greater  dispatch  than  are  all  the  churches. 
As  they  shorten  human  life,  they  dispatch  the  work  of 
emptying  all  the  hells  into  heaven ! !  It  remains,  therefore, 
for  Mr.  Manford  to  tell  us  why  he  should  not  look  upon 
"rum  holes,  gambling  dens,  and  places  of  prostitution" 
as  means  of  grace,  hurrying  men  out  of  bad  and  de- 
moralizing neighborhoods  into  heaven,  where  they  may 
be  reconciled  to  God  and  saved !  — means  by  which  God 
"moves"  the  sinner  "to  a  more  virtuous  locality"! 

One  word  as  to  the  book  of  Revelations.  The  "  temple  " 
spoken  of  in  the  eleventh  chapter,  is  not  the  Jewish 
temple  that  stood  at  Jerusalem.  Later  and  better  critics 
than  Dr.  Clarke  have  decided  that  this  book  was  written 
several  years  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  But  I 
feel  littl?  concern  about  this  matter,  as  I  have  no  argu- 
ment depending  upon  its  determination  one  way  or  the 
other. 

The  gentleman  tells  us,  that,  though  the  Christian 
dispensation  will  end,  the  dispensation  of  "  Forgiveness 
will  end  only  when  God  ends."  Surely  there  is  some- 
thing "  oracular  in  that  unadorned  gravity  and  shortness 
in  the  expression."  Please  inform  us  how  forgiveness 
will  be  dispensed,  when  the  Christian  dispensation  has 
ended .? 

"  The  promise  to  the  fathers."  We  are  told  that  the 
salvation  of  the  promise  is  partly  conditional  and  partly 
not!  and  that  man  is  free  to  comply  or  not  to  comply 
with  the  conditions.  How,  then,  I  ask  in  the  name  of 
logic,  can  any  man  prove  that  all  will  be  wholly  saved.'' 
So  far  as  that  salvation  is  conditional,  no  man  can  prove 


1 68  Oi'al  Discussion. 

all  will  enjoy  It,  so  long  as  it  is  admitted  that  men  are 
free  to  comply  or  not  with  the  conditions.  But  the 
gentleman  now  says,  "all  are  to  be  blessed  by  being 
raised  from  the  dead."  This  is  not  in  the  Bible,  It  is 
not  true.  Some  will  "  come  forth  to  shame  and  everlast- 
ing contempt,"  "  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation." 

XVI.  "  All  nations  whom  thou  hast  made  shall  come 
and  worship  before  thee,  O  Lord,  and  shall  glorify  thy 
name."  There  is  nothing  in  this  passage  that  reaches 
the  case  in  hand.  Doubtless  the  Psalmist  I'efers  to  the 
Gospel  dispensation,  wherein  the  worship  of  God  is  not 
confined  to  one  nation  as  it  was  then.  Now  the  Gospel 
is  to  be  preached  to  all  nations;  but  that  each  individual 
of  the  nations,  to  whom  the  Gospel  is  preached,  does  or 
ever  will  worship  God  and  be  saved,  is  certainly  more 
than  can  be  proved  by  this  passage.  But  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  we  are  not  debating  about  nations,  but 
about  those  "who  leave  this  world  sinful;"  about  those 
who  belong  to  no  nation.  Suppose  all  nations  of  earth 
were  to  turn  and  worship  God  to-morrow,  would  that 
prove  that  those  who  have  long  since  left  this  woi'ld 
sinful  are  or  ever  will  be  saved  }     I  think  not. 

XVII.  The  gentleman's  sevententh  argument  is 
drawn  from  some  fragments  of  the  twenty-fifth  chapter 
of  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah.  The  best  way  to  reply  to 
this  argument,  that  I  think  of  just  now,  is  to  read  a  few 
more  verses,  beginning  just  where  he  left  off:  "  In  that 
day  shall  this  song  be  sung  in  the  land  of  Judah :  We 
have  a  strong  city :  Salvation  will  God  appoint  for  walls 
and  bulwarks.  Open  ye  the  gates,  that  the  righteous 
nation  that  keepcth  the  truth  may  enter  in.  Thou  v/ilt 
keep  him  in  perfect  peace  whose  mind  is  stayed  on  thee; 
because  he  trusteth  in  thee."     And  still  a  little  further 


Universal  Salvation.  169 

on  we  read :  "  Let  favor  be  shown  to  the  wicked,  yet 
will  he  not  learn  righteousness ;  in  the  land  of  upright- 
ness will  he  deal  unjustly,  and  will  not  behold  the 
majesty  of  the  Lord.  Lord,  when  thy  hand  is  lifted  up, 
they  will  not  see ;  but  they  shall  see,  and  be  ashamed 
for  their  envy  at  the  people ;  yea^  the  fire  of  thine  ene- 
mies shall  devour  them'''  And  this  shall  be  " in  that 
day"  when  my  friend  thinks  all  evil  will  be  destroyed, 
and  all  men  saved!  What  a  singular  witness  this,  for 
Universalism ! 

XVin.  The  gentleman's  eighteenth  argument  is  an 
attempt  to  answer  the  question,  "where  do  men  go 
when  they  leave  this  world  sinful?"  True,  he  leaves 
off  the  word  "sinful;"  but  no  one  need  wonder  at  that; 
for  to  skip  the  hard  words  is  not  a  weakness  peculiar  to 
any  one  man.  He  quotes  three  passages  of  scripture,  i. 
"  The  spirit  shall  return  unto  God  who  gave  it."  But 
the  passage  does  not  speak  particularly  of  the  spirit  of 
him  who  dies  sinful.  It  does  not  say  the  spirit  goes  to 
God  reconciled  and  saved.  It  does  not  say  it  goes  there 
to  be  reconciled  and  saved.  It  docs  not,  therefore, 
answer  his  purpose.  2.  "  And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from 
the  earth,  will  draw  all  men  unto  me."  Jesus  spoke 
these  words,  signifying  the  manner  of  his  death.  They 
neither  express  nor  imply  the  reconciliation  and  salvation 
of  every  individual,  as  has  been  shown  a  thousand  times, 
and  in  various  ways.  Grant  that  "all  men"  here  means 
every  individual  of  the  race — which  cannot  be  shown,  how- 
ever— and  then  the  questions  come  up,  in  what  sense  will 
he  di*aw  all  men  unto  him  ?  and  what  for  ?  The  passage 
fails  him.  3.  "For  of  him,  and  through  him,  and  to 
him  are  all  things."  If  this  passage  proves  the  salvation 
of  all,  it  proves  that  all  are  novj  saved.  It  is  in  the 
15 


170  Oral  Discussion. 

present  tense:  "Of  him,  and  through  him,  and  to  him 
are  all  things."  Does  the  gentleman  believe  that  all 
things  are  now  of  God,  in  the  sense  of  being  reconciled 
and  saved  ?  I  presume  not.  Then  the  passage  does  not 
serve  his  i:)urpose. 

XIX.  The  ninteenth  argument  is  drawn  from  the 
prophecy  of  Isaiah,  chapter  xlv.  33-3=^.  "Look  unto 
me,  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of  the  earth ;  for  I  am 
God,  and  there  is  none  else.  I  have  sworn  by  myself, 
the  word  is  gone  out  of  my  mouth  in  righteousness,  and 
shall  not  return.  That  unto  me  every  knee  shall  bow, 
every  tongue  shall  swear.  Surely  shall  one  say,  In  the 
Lord  have  I  righteousness  and  strength;  even  to  him 
shall  men  come;  and  all  that  are  incensed  against  him 
shall  be  ashamed.  In  the  Lord  shall  all  the  seed  of 
Israel  be  justified,  and  shall  glory." 

I.  In  this  language  God  calls  upon  all  to  "look"  unto 
him  and  " be  saved"  which  shows  that  salvation  is  con- 
ditional. 

3.  The  oath  of  the  Lord,  "That  unto  me  every  knee 
shall  bow,  every  tongue  shall  swear,"  is  used  by  the 
apostle  Paul  to  prove  a  proposition  differing  very  mate- 
rially from  the  proposition  the  gentleman  quotes  it  to 
prove.  Paul  cites  this  passage  to  prove  that,  "We  shall 
all  stand  before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ."  Rom.  xiv. 
10,  II.  Mr.  Manford  quotes  it  to  prove  that  "all 
who  leave  this  world  sinful  will  finally  be  reconciled  to 
God,  and  saved."  I  think  Paul  better  understood  it. 
Mr.  Manford  does  not  claim  that  the  proj^hccy  is  ful- 
filled in  this  world.  He  applies  it,  of  course,  to  the 
future  state,  in  applying  it  to  his  proposition,  which 
relates  to  persons  who  leave  this  world  sinful.  But  Paul 
applies  it  to  "the  judgment  seat  of  Christ."     Therefore, 


Universal  Salvation.  i*ji 

Paul  and  Mr.  Manforcl  both  beinj^  correct,  the  judg- 
ment is  in  the  future  world.  So,  with  this  passage  the 
gentleman  upsets  Universalisra,  and  helps  me  to  prove 
the  proposition  I  have  agreed  to  prove  when  we  are  done 
with  this !     Much  obliged. 

3.  "All  that  are  incensed  against  him  shall  be 
ashamed."  This  puts  shame  in  the  future  world.  The 
gentleman  says,  they  "  shall  be  ashamed  of  their  sins, 
and  go  and  bow  before  the  Lord,"  etc.  But  that  is  not 
what  the  text  says;  only  his  comment.  The  passage 
teaches  that  some  persons,  such  as  are  incensed  against 
the  Lord,  "  shall  be  ashamed,"  in  the  resurrection.  As 
to  this  "  shame,"  and  what  shall  follow,  let  us  allow  the 
prophet  to  interpret  himself.  Turn  back  to  the  twenty- 
sixth  chapter  of  this  same  book,  to  a  passage  the  gentle- 
man himself  applied  to  the  future  world,  while  on  his 
seventeenth  argument,  and  read :  "  They  |"the  wicked] 
shall  see,  and  shall  be  ashamed  for  their  envy  at  the 
people;  yea^  the  fire  of  thine  enemies  shall  devour 
them^  And  to  this  agree  the  words  of  Daniel — "  And 
at  that  time  thy  people  shall  be  delivered,  every  one  that 
shall  be  found  written  in  the  book.  And  many  of  them 
that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to 
everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame.,  everlasting  con- 
tempt." Daniel  xii.  i,  2.  And  to  these  agree  the  words 
of  the  Savior:  "The  hour  is  coming,  in  which  all  that 
are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come 
forth;  they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection  of 
life ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection 
of  damnation."    John  v.  28,  29. 

XX.  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all 
be  made  alive;  but  every  man  in  his  own  order;  Christ 
the  first  fruits;  afterward  they  that  are  Christ's  at  his 
coming."     i  Cor.  xv.  22,  23. 


^ 


t*j2  Oral  Discussion. 

I.  This  passage,  it  is  generally  conceded,  teaches  a 
universal  resuirection  of  the  dead.  By  Adam  death 
prevails  universally ;  that  is,  what  we  call  natural  death 
— all  men  go  down  to  the  grave;  "even  so  in  Christ 
shall  all  he  made  alive;"  all  shall  be  raised  from  the 
dead.  The  resurrection  spoken  of  is  not  moral,  but  a 
resuiTection  of  the  body  from  the  grave.  It  is  a 
resurrection  of  which  Christ  was  the  "first  fruits;" 
and  it  will  hardly  be  contended  that  his  was  a  moi^al 
resurrection.  Besides,  the  apostle  says  it  is  a  resur- 
rection of  the  body  of  which  he  speaks :  "  It  is  sown  a 
natural  [animal]  body^  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body." 
Verse  44. 

2.  The  phrases,  "in  Adam"  and  "in  Christ,"  do  not, 
as  my  friend  seems  to  think,  indicate  77ioral  states.,  but 
agencies.  As  to  moral  state,  christians  do  not  die  "  in 
Adam,"  but  "in  Christ;"  "Blessed  are  they  that  die  in 
the  Lord."  As  to  moral  state,  or  condition,  sinners  will 
not  be  "in  Christ"  at  the  resurrection.  What  is  there 
between  death  and  the  resurrection,  with  the  Universalist 
view  of  the  resurrection  especially,  to  put  one  in  Christ 
who  died  out  of  him  "i  Can  the  worthy  gentleman  tell  t 
He  believes  a  man's  resurrection  takes  place  the  moment 
he  dies,  and  what  is  there  in  dying.,  pray,  to  change 
one's  moral  state .^  Here  is  where  I  own  I  "need 
enlightenment." 

3.  "But  every  man  in  his  own  order."  "Every 
man"  means  all  men,  as  the  gentleman  said;  but 
"every"  is  distributive;  and  in  this  passage  it  is  distri- 
butive of  men;  "every  jna7t  in  his  own  order."  The 
gentleman  has  two  orders,  it  is  true,  but  he  has  one  order 
for  Christ,  and  one  order  for-  all  mankind.  But  it  must 
be  observed  that  the  apostle  distributes  men  into  differ- 


Universal  Salvation.  173 

ent  orders  —  every  man  in  his  own  order."  By  the 
expression,  "they  that  are  Christ's"  the  apostle  implies 
that  in  the  resurrection  there  will  be  some  who  are 
not  Christ's,  and  the  two  classes  comprise  the  different 
orders.  Then  in  the  resurrection,  there  will  be  such  as 
are  Christ's,  and  such  as  are  not  Christ's.  In  other 
words,  "  the  just  and  the  unjust."  In  still  other  words, 
"  they  that  have  done  good,"  and  "  they  that  have  done 
evil." 

4.  Beginning  at  the  thirty-fifth  verse,  the  apostle 
speaks  descriptively  of  the  resurrection  of  them  '•'•that 
are  Chrisfs.^'  This  should  be  particularly  observed. 
In  the  forty-first  verse  it  is  not  the  apostle's  intention 
to  illustrate  different  degrees  of  glory  in  the  future 
world;  but  the  difference  between  the  body  we  now 
have,  and  "  the  body  that  shall  be : "  "  one  glory  of  the 
sun,  another  glory  of  the  moon,  and  another  glory  of 
the  stars ;  for  star  differeth  from  star  in  gloiy ;  so  also  is 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead^  it  [the  body]  is  sown  in 
coiTuption,  it  is  raised  in  incorruption,"  etc.  As  star 
differeth  from  star  —  or  as  the  sim  differeth  from  the 
moon — so  the  body  "that  shall  be"  shall  differ  from  the 
body  that  now  is,  in  glory.  This  is  evidently  the  point 
the  apostle  illustrates. 

5.  "And  as  we  [christians]  have  borne  the  image  of 
the  earthy,  we  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly." 
This  promise  can  be  appropriated  by  none  but  christians, 
whose  "conversation  is  in  heaven;  from  whence  also  we 
look  for  the  Savior,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  who  shall 
change  our  vile  body^  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like  unto 
his  glorious  body."     [Time  expired. 


1 74  Oral  Discussion. 


[mr.  manford's  seventh  speech.] 

Mr.  Sweeney  calls  my  affirmative,  namely,  that  all 
sinners  will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  an  "  enormity." 
That  ugly  word  means  an  atrocious  crime  of  the  deepest 
die.  In  his  estimation,  then,  the  hope  that  sin  will 
finally  yield  to  virtue,  wrong  to  right,  injustice  to  justice, 
evil  to  good,  hate  to  love,  is  a  monstrous  crime,  and 
deserves,  I  suppose,  nothing  short  of  endless  damnation. 
What  an  "enormity"  it  is  for  God  to  will  such  a  result. 
What  an  "  enormity  "  for  Christ  to  live  and  die  to  that 
end.  What  an  "enormity"  for  the  pure  and  good  to 
pray  that  all  sinners  may  be  converted  to  God.  But  the 
gentleman  can  see  no  "  enormity  "  in  God's  perpetuating 
sin,  wrong,  vengeance,  wrath,  yea,  the  whole  catalogue 
of  crime,  eternally.  That  is  all  beautiful,  divine !  I  do 
not  wish,  as  he  intimates,  to  "  blot  out  the  line  between 
christians  and  aliens,"  but  to  convert  "aliens"  into  chris- 
tians. And  is  not  that  the  better  way.?  It  is  the  will 
of  Heaven  they  should  be  converted,  and  it  will  be  his 
will  till  all  shall  be  converted.  He  does  not  deny,  that 
"he  don't  know"  what  becomes  of  the  millions  of 
christians  who  die  without  immersion.  He  "don't 
know"  whether  God  or  the  devil  has  them.  He  "don't 
know"  whether  they  are  in  heaven  or  hell.  All  his  talk 
about  my  believing  that  "  sinners  are  taken  to  heaven  " 
was  put  in  to  fill  up  his  time.  He  knew,  of  course,  he 
v/as  bearing  false  witness  against  his  neighbor.  I  for- 
give him.  He  had  to  say  something.  But  would  it  not 
be  better  to  take  all  sinners  into  heaven,  and  then  all 
hands  go  to  work  and  make  good  men  and  women  of 
them,  than  to  turn  them  all  into  an  endless  hell,  for  the 


Universal  Salvation. 


/3 


devil  eternally  to  corrupt?  Would  Christ,  who  died  to 
save  them,  object?  Would  Paul,  the  heathen  apostle, 
object?  Would  Whiteficld,  Wesley,  Howard,  Campbell, 
Sweeney,  object?  If  my  good  friend  here  should  dis- 
cover that  his  wife,  children,  parents,  brothers,  sisters, 
were  all  there  without  being  immersed,  Vv^ould  he  forth- 
with move  that  they  be  expelled,  and  that,  too,  without 
an  efibrt  to  evangelize  them  ?  Would  all  his  love  for 
them  in  this  world  be  turned  into  hatred,  in  heaven  ? 
He  would  now,  I  trust,  make  most  any  sacrifice  for  their 
good.  In  heaven  would  he  not  be  willing  to  make  any  ? 
When  he  gets  to  heaven  will  he  strut  about  in  a  white 
robe,  and  care  for  nobody  but  himself?  But  my  friend 
does  not  seem  to  know  what  heaven  is.  He  evidently 
thinks  it  is  a  substantially  built  town,  with  well  paved 
streets,  and  that  its  inhabitants  amuse  themselves  with 
psalm-singing  and  fast  driving.  The  truth  is,  heaven  is 
within  the  soul;  and  when  heaven  is  there,  heaven  is  all 
around.  But  it  must  be  there  first  of  all.  I  like  the 
good  old  hymn, 

"  When  I  am  happy  in  him, 
December  's  as  pleasant  as  May." 

This  inward  joy  makes  December  like  a  Alay  morn- 
ing. 

On  the  other  hand — 

"  How  tedious  and  tasteless  the  hours, 
When  Jesus  no  longer  I  see, 
Sweet  prospects,  sweet  birds,  and  sweet  flowers. 
Have  lost  all  their  sweetness  to  me." 

This  is  what  the  poet  means,  when  he  says — 

•*  He  that  hath  no  inward  beauty,  none  perceives." 


176  Oral  Discussion. 

Another  sings — 

"He  that  has  light  within  his  own  clear  breast, 
May  sit  in  the  centre,  and  enjoy  bright  day ; 
But  he  that  hides  a  dark  soul  and  foul  thoughts, 
Benighted  walks  under  the  mid-day  sun." 

But  there  is  a  spirit-world,  and  all  go  to  it.  It  maybe 
the  boundless  universe.  Jesus  tells  us,  that  in  it  are 
MANY  MANSIONS.  The  apostle  Paul  calls  them  heavens 
— he  was  in  the  third  one.  How  many  more  there  are, 
he  does  not  say.  Jesus  says  there  are  many.  The  con- 
dition of  the  soul  makes  these  heavens. 

The  gentleman's  talk  about  the  Promises  quoted  in 
my  last,  did  not  amount  to  much,  for  the  good  reason, 
that  not  much  can  be  said  against  them.  He  did  as  well 
as  the  best  could  do.  "  Let  it  be  remembered,"  he  said, 
"  that  we  are  debating  about  those  who  belong  to  no 
nation."  Will  he  have  the  kindness,  then,  to  tell  us 
who  we  are  debating  about,  for  I  never  heard  of  one 
that  "  belonged  to  no  nation."  The  promise  is,  that 
"  all  nations  of  the  earth,"  "  all  nations  whom  God  has 
made,"  "  all  families  of  the  earth,"  "  all  kindreds  of  the 
earth,"  are  to  be  blessed  in  Christ,  and  go  and  "  worship 
before  God,  and  glorify  his  name."  Now,  if  he  can  find  a 
man,  woman  or  child,  that  does  not  sustain  one  of  these  re- 
lations, I  will  not  attempt  to  prove  his,  her  or  its  salvation. 
Let  him  address  himself  to  this  task.  But  he  says,  none 
of  these  earthly  relations  will  exist  in  the  other  world. 
How  docs  he  know  that.?  When  a  son  or  a  daughter 
goes  to  heaven,  is  the  tie  severed,  for  eternity,  that  con- 
nected the  dear  one  with  the  parents?  It  seems  to  me, 
that  much  of  the  happiness  of  heaven  will  result  from 
w'hole  families  being  there  —  not  a  member  lost.  Yes, 
the  relation  of  family,  kindred,  will  survive  death ;  and 


Universal  Salvation.  177 

the  blessed  promise  is,  that  all  families,  and  all 
KINDREDS  shall  be  blessed  in  Christ. 

The  "day"  spoken  of  in  Isaiah  twenty-fifth,  at  the 
end  of  which  death  is  to  be  abolished,  and  tears  wiped 
from  all  faces,  is  the  Gospel  day,  the  day  of  Christ's 
reign.  It  commenced  long  ago,  and  will  end  when 
God  shall  be  all  in  all.  But  during  that  day  Jesus 
was  to  judge  all,  as  well  as  in  the  end  bless  all.  When 
the  prophet  says,  that  "the  fire  of  thine  enemies  shall 
devour  them,"  he  is  not  writing  of  the  etid  of  that  day, 
but  of  what  would  transpire  before  the  end.  Let  that 
be  remembered.  The  gentleman  seems  to  be  oblivious 
to  that  important  distinction.  That  glorious  Promise, 
which  Paul  says  will  be  consummated  in  the  resurrection, 
my  friend  left  untouched. 

I  showed  in  my  last,  that  all  spirits,  all  men,  all  things, 
are  heavenward  bound.  Let  Mr.  Sweeney  show,  that 
most  of  them  will  be  driven  from  heaven  into  eternal  night 
—  if  he  can.  He  does  not  deny,  that  the  passages  I 
quoted  teach  that  all  go  to  God,  "  To  him  are  all  things" 
reads  one  of  them,  that  is,  all  things  are  tending  to  God. 
But  he  seems  to  think  that  the  satan  of  his  creed  will  be 
at  hand;  and,  as  he,  several  years  ago,  got  up  a  rebellion 
in  heaven,  he  will  make  a  raid  on  the  outskirts  of  para- 
dise, and  run  off  the  biggest  half  of  mankind,  after  thev 
return  to  God.  VThe  truth  is,  God  is  the  great  central 
attraction  of  the  iJhiverse.  All  men  came  from  him, 
are  his  children,  created  in  his  image,  and  will  finally  be 
drawn  back  to  him,  and  then  God  will  be  all  in  all. 
Sublime  truth.  "^ 

The  oath  of  God.  Mr.  Sweeney  says,  Paul  cites  this 
to  prove  the  judgment.  The  passage  mclxxde?,  judgment 
and  salvation.     During  the  time  of  the   Savior's  reism 


178  Oral  Discussion. 

he  judges  and  saves.  He  does  not  merely  judge;  he 
does  not  merely  save;  he  does  both.  But  at  the  end  of 
his  reign,  of  his  judgment,  every  tongue  will  swear,  "  In 
the  Lord  have  I  righteousness  and  strength."  This 
will  be  the  result  of  his  judgment.  This  work  com- 
menced when  Christ  came  in  his  kingdom  eighteen 
hundred  years  ago,  this  work  of  judgment  and  salvation, 
and  it  will  continue  till  all  are  righteous,  all  are  recon- 
ciled and  saved. 

He  says,  some  will  be  ashamed  in  the  resurrection. 
That  may  be.  Good  people  in  this  world  are  sometimes 
ashamed  of  what  they  once  did,  but  that  docs  not  prove 
they  will  be  turned  into  hell.  Said  Paul  to  his  Roman 
brethren,  "What  fruit  had  ye  then  in  those  things 
whereof  ye  are  ?iotv  ashamed?''^  Rom.  vi.  21.  To  be 
ashamed  of  sin  is  a  long  step  heavenward.  And  if  in 
the  resurrection  all  who  were  incensed  against  God  will 
be  ashamed,  as  the  gentleman  asserts,  they  surely  will 
not  be  far  from  the  kingdom.  But  the  prophet  does  not 
say  any  will  be  ashamed  in  the  resurrection.  He  simply 
says,  "  All  that  are  " — in  his  day — "  incensed  shall  be 
ashamed."  It  is  possible  for  men  to  reform  in  this 
world  and  be  ashamed  too,  as  the  Romans  were.  The 
gentleman  confounds  being  in  a  shameful,  degraded 
condition,  with  being  ashamed  of  our  sins.  There  is 
immense  difference  between  them,  but  he  does  not  see  it. 

The  resurrection.  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in 
Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive."  i  Cor.  xv.  33.  Mr.  S. 
admits  this  means  the  resurrection  of  all  mankind.  Very 
good.  All  mankind,  then,  are  to  be  made  alive  in 
Christ.  This  he  admits.  Let  this  be  remembered. 
Now,  what  do  the  words  "in  Christ"  mean.'*  Let  the 
author  of  them   tell   us.     ^'If  any  man  be  in  Christ,  he 


Universal  Salvation.  lyg 

is  a  new  creature ;  old  things  are  passed  away ;  behold 
all  things  are  become  new."  3  Cor.  v.  17.  The  apostle 
says,  '-'•If  any  man  be  in  Christ"  he  is  in  this  condition, 
and  he  asserts,  that  all  who  die  in  Adam  will  be  in 
Christ.  Again,  "There  is  therefore  no  condemnation 
to  them  that  are  in  Christ,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh, 
but  after  the  spirit."  Rom.  viii.  i.  My  friend  admits, 
that  all  mankind  will  be  raised  in  Christ,  and  Paul  says, 
"  There  is  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are  in  Christ." 
Paul's  explanation  of  his  own  words  makes  the  passage 
grand  and  glorious.  The  pure  and  good  are  in  Christ 
now.  "The  men  of  grace  find  heaven  begun  below." 
But  the  promise  is,  that  finally  all  who  die  in  Adam, 
will  be  in  Christ — pure  and  good. 

"Every  man  in  his  own  order."  "Eveiy  man"  is  to 
be  in  Christ — so  says  Paul,  so  says  brother  Sweeney. 
My  friend  thinks  the  passage  implies,  that  some  will  not 
be  Christ's.  But  I  ask,  when  all  mankind  will  be  in 
Christy  will  they  not  be  Christ's?  Will  he  answer? 
But  the  gentleman  tells  us,  that  Paul  writes  only  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  body.  All  bodies,  Mr.  S.  says,  will 
be  raised  in  Christ.  /When  that  shall  be  done,  he  con- 
tends that  all  the  conaipt,  deformed,  debased,  sinful, 
damnable  spirits  in  hell  will  be  dragged  out  of  their 
miserable  dens,  and  put  into  those  bodies  that  will  be 
raised  in  Christ  !  Christ  and  the  devil,  perfect  purity 
and  total  depravity,  will  then  be  united,  and  behold  a 
marriage  of  heaven  and  hell!  Such  pure  bodies  and 
corrupt  souls  could  not  exist  together  one  moment. 
They  would  fly  asunder  like  fire  and  water.  The  truth 
is,  the  apostle  speaks  of  the  resurrection  of  the  wJiole 
man^  not  of  a  part;  and  he  is  to  be  raised  in  the  image 
of  the  heavenly.     "And  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of 


i8o  Oral  Discussion. 

the  earthy,  we  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly." 
As  all  who  die  in  Adam  are  to  be  blessed  in  Christ,  of 
course  the  Corinthians  will  share  in  the  blessedness. 
I  will  now  offer  some  more  affirmative  arguments. 

XXI.  "  For  Christ  hath  once  suffered  for  sins,  the 
just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God,  being 
put  to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  by  the  spirit; 
by  which  (spirit)  he  went  and  preached  unto  the  spirits 
in  prison^  which  (spirits)  sometimes  were  disobedient, 
(as)  when  once  the  long-suffering  of  God  waited  in  the 
days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  preparing,  wherein 
few,  that  is,  eight  souls,  were  saved  by  water."  i  Peter 
iii.  18-20.  "For  this  cause  was  the  Gospel  preached 
also  to  them  that  are  dead,  that  they  might  be  judged 
according  to  men  in  the  flesh,  but  live  according  to  God 
in  the  spirit."  i  Peter  iv.  6.  This  is  plain  language. 
The  Gospel  was  preached  to  the  dead,  preached  to  the 
SPIRITS  IN  PRISON,  that  they  might  "  live  according  to 
God  in  the  spirit."  Now,  wherever  spirits  are  in  prison, 
wherever  the  dead  are,  efforts  are  made  for  their  salvation, 
let  the  prison  be  where  it  may,  let  the  dead  be  where 
they  may.  If  there  are  spirits  in  prison  beyond  the 
grave,  if  any  are  dead  there  in  any  sense,  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  has  been  there  to  efi'ect  their  deliverance.  But 
this  Mr.  Sweeney  denies.  He  asserts,  that  there  is  a 
vast  prison  beyond  the  grave  in  which  are  countless 
millions  of  spirits,  countless  millions  of  the  dead,  and 
that  mercy  was  never  offered  to  one  of  them,  and  never 
will  be. 

XXII.  The  evangelical  prophet  represents  God  as 
saying  to  his  Son  Jesus,  "Thus  saith  God  the  Lord,  he 
that  created  the  heavens,  and  stretched  them  out;  he 
that  spread  forth  the  earth,  and  that  which  cometh  out 


Universal  Salvation.  i8i 

of  it ;  he  that  givcth  breath  unto  the  people  upon  it,  and 
spirit  to  them  that  walk  therein :  I  the  Lord  have  called 
thee  in  righteousness,  and  will  hold  thy  hand,  and  will 
keep  thee,  and  give  thee  for  a  covenant  of  the  people, 
for  a  light  of  the  Gentiles;  to  open  the  blind  eyes,  to 
bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the  prison,  and  them  that 
sit  in  darkness  out  of  the  prison-house.  *  *  *  And 
I  will  bring  the  blind  by  a  way  that  they  knew  not;  I 
will  lead  them  in  paths  that  they  have  not  known :  I 
will  make  darkness  light  before  them,  and  crooked  things 
straight.  These  things  will  I  do  unto  them,  and  not 
forsake  them."  Isa.  xlii.  5-7,  16.  Jesus  was  to  open 
"blind  eyes,"  "bring  the  blind  by  a  way  they  knew 
not,"  "bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the  prison."  Let 
tlie  prison  be  where  it  may,  Christ  is  to  open  it,  and 
liberate  its  victims.  This  Mr.  S.  denies;  and  earnestly 
contends,  that  God  has  an  immense  prison-house,  in 
which  are  locked  up  nine-tenths  of  those  made  in  his 
image,  and  that  he  would  not  save  them  if  he  could,  and 
could  not  if  he  would.  He  will  have  it,  that  an  effort 
never  was  made,  and  never  will  be  made,  for  their  re- 
demption. 

XXIIL  The  same  prophet  again  represents  God  as 
saying,  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  God  is  upon  me;  be- 
cause the  Lord  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings 
unto  the  meek;  he  hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken- 
hearted, to  proclaim  liberty  to  the  captives,  and  the 
opening  of  the  prison  to  them  that  are  bound."  Isa. 
Ixi.  I.  Jesus  quoted  this  jDassage  (Luke  iv.  18,)  and 
said,  "This  day  is  this  scripture  fulfilled  in  your  ears." 
He  had  commenced  the  glorious  work  which  would 
result  in  the  opening  all  eyes,  in  restoring  all  the  dead  to 
life,  opening  all  prisons,  breaking  all  chains,  and  liberat- 


1 82  Oral   Discussion, 

ing  all  captives;  hence  he  is  called  "The  Savior  of 
THE  WORLD."  How  wcU  this  all  accords  with  the 
announcement  and  song  of  the  angels  at  the  birth  of 
the  great  Liberator,  "  And  the  angel  said  unto  them, 
Fear  not :  for  behold,  I  bring  you  good  tidings  of  great 
joy,  which  shall  be  to  all  people.  For  unto  you  is  born 
this  day,  in  the  city  of  David,  a  Savior,  which  is  Christ 
the  Lord."  "And  suddenly  there  was  with  the  angel  a 
multitude  of  the  heavenly  host  praising  God,  and  saying. 
Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  good 
will  toward  men."     Luke  ii.  lo,  ii,  13,  14.     His  advent 

was    GOOD    TIDINGS    OF  GREAT   JOY    TO    ALL    PEOPLE    bc- 

cause  he  would  open  all  eyes,  break  all  fetters,  liberate 
all  souls,  and  give  them  freedom,  life  and  salvation. 
Well  might  the  heavenly  host  praise  God,  and  ciy, 
"Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,"  and  on  earth  peace, 
and  good  will  to  men."  But  what  mockery  all  this 
was,  if  there  was  then  a  vast  prison-house  crowded  with 
victims,  and  that  same  Jesus,  whose  advent  the  angels 
so  joyously  announced,  will  consign  innumerable  mil- 
lions more  to  the  same  wretched  place,  and  never  make 
an  effort  to  redeem  one  of  them. 

In  perfect  harmony  with  this  song  and  statement, 
Jesus,  when  on  earth,  said,  that  he  came  to  seek  and 
to  save  the  lost.  Wherever  there  is  a  soul  lost  it  is  the 
business  of  Jesus  to  save  him,  to  bring  him  back  to  his 
God,  to  the  home  he  has  abandoned.  And  will  his 
mission  be  a  grand  failure?  A  prophet  asserts,  that 
Jesus  "  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and  be  satis- 
fied." Satisfied  is  the  word.  Will  he  be  satisfied  with 
the  redemption  of  half  he  lived  and  died  to  save.''  He 
will,  then,  be  easily  satisfied.  I  cannot  think  so  meanly 
of  my  Lord  and  Master.     The  woman  who  lost  a  piece 


Universal  Salvation.  183 

of  silver,  was  not  satisfied  till  the  lost  was  found.  The 
shepherd  who  lost  a  sheep  was  not  satisfied  till  the  lost 
was  found,  and  will  the  Son  of  God  be  satisfied  with 
the  redemption  of  only  part  of  God's  offspring?  It 
cannot  be  that  he  will. 

XXIV.     "Wherefore    God    also  hath    highly  exalted 
him,  and  given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name: 
that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow,  of 
things  in  heaven,  and   things  in  earth,  and   things  under 
the  earth;    and  that  every  tongue  should   confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father. 
Wherefore,  my  beloved,  as  ye  have  always  obeyed,  not 
as  in   my   presence   only,  but   now  much   more  in   my 
absence,   work   out   your  own  salvation  with  fear  and 
ti^embling.     For  it  is  God  which  worketh  in  you  both  to 
will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure."     Phil.   ii.  9-13. 
In   this   important   passage  we    are   taught,    that   God 
has  given  Christ  a  name  above  every  name  for  specific 
purposes,    and    those    purposes    are:     i.    That   at    that 
great    name     every    knee    in    heaven^    on    the    earthy 
and  under  the  earthy   should  bow,   that  is,   do   Christ 
reverence;  3.  That  eveiy  tongue  ia  heaven,  on  earth, 
and    under    the    earth,    should    confess    that   Jesus    is 
Lord;  3.  That  this   universal  reverence   and   confession 
would  be  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father  ;  4.  That 
God  is  working  by  his  Spirit,  in  men,  that  they  may  do 
his  good  pleasure,  by  accepting  of  Jesus  as  the  way,  the 
truth,   and  the  life;    5.  That  we  should  work  out  our 
salvation  by  acknowledging  that  great  name,  and  par- 
taking of  his  Spirit.     I  wish   it  to  be   distinctly  under- 
stood, that  this  universal   bowing  and  confession  is  to  be 
to  the  GLORY  OF  GOD.     Therefore,  it  must  be  voluntary, 
and  from  love  and  reverence.     This  passage  means  uni- 
versal salvation,  and  nothing  else. 


184  Oral  Discussion. 

XXV.  All  will  be  reconciled  to  God.  "  Therefore, 
if  any  man  be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature ;  old  things 
are  passed  away;  behold,  all  things  are  become  new. 
And  all  things  are  of  God,  who  hath  reconciled  us  to 
himself  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  hath  given  to  us  the  minis- 
try of  reconciliation,  to  wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ, 
reconciling  the  world  unto  himself,  not  imputing  their 
trespasses  unto  them ;  and  hath  committed  unto  us  the 
word  of  reconciliation.  Now  then  we  are  ambassadors 
for  Christ,  as  though  God  did  beseech  you  by  us;  we 
pray  you,  in  Christ's  stead,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God."  2 
Cor.  V.  17-20.  From  this  passage  we  learn  what  is 
meant  by  being  reconciled  to  God.  It  means  to  possess 
the  Spirit  of  God,  to  be  Christlike,  a  new  creature.  God 
is  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to  him  self.  Will  God 
fail,  or  will  the  work  be  done?  "For  by  him  were  all 
things  created,  that  are  in  heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth, 
visible  and  invisible,  whether  they  be  thrones,  or  domin- 
ions, or  principalities,  or  powers :  all  things  were  created 
by  him,  and  for  him :  and  he  is  before  all  things,  and 
by  him  all  things  consist,  and  he  is  the  head  of  the  body, 
the  church:  who  is  the  beginning,  the  first-born  from 
the  dead ;  that  in  all  things  he  might  have  the  pre-emi- 
nence. For  it  pleased  the  Father  that  in  him  should  all 
fulness  dwell ;  and  having  made  peace  through  the  blood 
of  his  cross,  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself; 
by  him,  I  say,  whether  they  be  things  in  earth,  or  things 
in  heaven.  And  you,  that  were  sometime  alienated  and 
enemies  in  your  mind  by  wicked  works,  yet  now  hath 
he  reconciled."  Col.  i.  16-31.  Here  we  are  taught — i. 
That  all  things,  visible  and  invisible,  are  for  Jesus;  3. 
That  in  all  things  he  has  the  pre-eminence;  3.  That  it 
is  God's  pleasure  that  in  Christ  should  all  fulness  dwell; 


Universal  Salvation.  185 

4.  That  it  is  God's  intention,  through  Jesus,  to  recon- 
cile ALL  THINGS  to  himself;  5.  This  work  of  reconcih- 
ation  had  commenced,  and  that  commencement  was  the 
jirst  fruit  of  the  universal  harvest,  the  reconciliation  of 
all  things. 

XXVI.  Universal  life  and  righteousness.  In  the 
fifth  chapter  of  Romans,  the  great  Gentile  apostle 
clearly  teaches,  that  grace,  and  life,  and  righteousness, 
will  finally  be  the  boon  of  Adam's  race.  Let  us 
carefully  note  his  statements.  "  Wherefore,  as  by 
one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death  by  sin; 
and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  sinned." 
The  first  man  sinned,  and  he  died — died  to  innocence, 
purity;  died  in  trespasses  and  in  sins,  which  is  said  to 
be  sin's  wages.  All  sin,  and  all  die  the  same  moral  death. 
But  he  continues,  "  But  not  as  the  oflense,  so  also  is  the 
free  gift.  For  if  through  the  oflense  of  one,  many  be 
dead,  much  more  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by 
grace,  which  is  by  one  man,  Jesus  Christ,  hath  abounded 
unto  many."  Adam  introduced  sin  into  the  world ;  and 
all  sin,  and  all  die,  for  all  admit  that  by  "many"  the 
apostle  means  the  mass,  the  whole,  all  mankind.  But 
the  gi'ace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by  gi-ace,  through  Jesus 
Christ,  does  much  more  abound.  Sin  curses  all,  but 
grace  blesses  all,  and  will  turn  all  from  iniquity.  The 
next  verse :  "  And  not  as  it  was  by  one  that  sinned,  so  is 
the  gift.  For  the  judgment  was  by  one  to  condemna- 
tion, but  the  free  gift  is  of  many  offenses  unto  justifica- 
tion." Here  again  it  is  taught,  that  the  "  free  gift  unto  jus- 
tification "  is  7nuch  fnore  than  sin  and  its  results.  He 
continues:  "Therefore,  as  by  the  offense  of  one  judg- 
ment came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation,  even  so  by 
the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men 
16 


1 86  Oral  Discussion. 

unto  justijication  of  lifey  Mark,  the  "  free  gift  unto 
justification  of  life  came  upon  all  men."  The  con- 
demnation came  to  all  men,  and  the  free  gift  to  justifi- 
cation came  unto  all.  Both  arc  universal,  both  extend 
to  all  men.  The  apostle  sums  up  all  he  has  said  in  these 
words,  "  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were 
made  sinners,,  so  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many 
BE  MADE  RIGHTEOUS."  Dr.  Clarke  says,  "that  the 
'many'  of  the  apostle  means  all  mankind^  needs  no 
proof."  All  MANKIND,  then,  "shall  be  made  right- 
eous." The  next  verse:  "Moreover  the  law  entered, 
that  sin  might  abound.  But  where  sin  abounded,  grace 
did  much  more  abotcndy  Here  he  repeats,  that  the 
grace  of  God  is  to  overwhelm,  destroy  sin,  and  bless  all 
mankind.  The  last  verse  in  the  chapter:  "That  as  sin 
hath  reigned  unto  death" — universal  death — "even  so 
might  grace  reign" — universally,  as  extensively  as  sin — 
"  through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life,  by  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord."  Well  might  Dr.  Adam  Clarke  at  the  con- 
clusion of  this  chapter,  exultingly  exclaim:  "Thus  we 
find,  that  the  salvation  from  sin  here,  is  as  extensive  and 
complete^  as  the  guilt  and  contamination  of  sin.  Death 
is  conquered^  hell  disappointed^  the  devil  confou7ided^ 
and  sin  TOTALLY  DESTROYED."     [  ri7ne  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  seventh  reply.] 

I  used  the  word  "enormity"  in  its  strictly  literal  sense, 
which  is  "  the  transgression  of  a  rule,  or  deviation  from 
right."  What  God  has  revealed  as  to  the  matter  in 
controversy  is  the  rule,  the  right,  and  the  gentleman's 
affirmation  goes  beyond  anything  God  has  revealed  us. 


Universal  Salvation.  1S7 

It  not  only  goes  beyond,  but  it  also  goes  contrary  to 
what  is  revealed  in  the  Bible,  and  therefore  I  spoke  of 
the  enormity  of  his  affirmation.  It  is  right  to  desire  the 
salvation  of  all  men,  and  to  labor  for  it.  God  so  desires, 
and  has  done  and  is  doing  all  he  can,  consistently  with 
the  laws  of  man's  being  and  happiness,  to  accomplish 
the  end.  He  desires  not  only  that  man  should  be  happy 
hereafter  but  now.  He  desires  the  present  happiness  of 
men,  and  all  good  men  should  labor  and  pray  for  the 
accomplishment  of  this  end.  God,  and  all  godly  men, 
desire  a  present  triumph  of  good  over  evil,  of  justice 
over  injustice,  of  happiness  over  misery,  of  salvation 
over  condemnation.  There  is  nothing  enormous  about 
all  this.  But  for  any  one  to  lift  up  his  voice  and  affirm 
that  good,  justice,  virtue,  salvation,  heaven,  are  triumph- 
ant, and  that  all  men  arc  good,  just,  virtuous,  and  saved, 
would  be  false,  enormously  f:\lse.  It  is  good  to  visit  the 
sick,  minister  to  their  wants,  and  try  to  restore  them  to 
health ;  but  what  would  we  say  of  the  man  who  would 
go  about  declaring  that  all  the  sick  will  get  well  whether 
they  use  the  proper  means  of  recovery  or  not?  It  is 
good,  it  is  godlike,  to  try  to  reform  all  evil-disposed  and 
wicked  persons,  as  God  desires  their  reformation,  and  all 
heaven  desires  it;  but  for  one  to  go  about  telling  all  the 
wicked  there  is  no  danger  of  any  failing  to  be  reformed 
and  saved  would  be,  to  say  the  very  least,  unfriendly 
to  the  end.  For  the  man  who  persists  in  sin  there  is 
only  danger  ahead — no  matter  how  far  ahead — and  he 
who  preaches  to  him  peace  and  safety  in  the  future — no 
matter  how  far  in  the  future — opposes  the  haith,  and  is 
no  friend  to  virtue,  or  even  to  the  sinner  himself.  That 
such  an  one  vicans  to  oppose  the  truth,  and  to  be  un- 
friendly to  virtue  and  to  the  sinner,  I,  of  course,  would 


1 88  Oral  Discussion. 

not  affirm.  I  can  never  express  the  gratitude  I  feel 
toward  God  and  a  merciful  Heaven,  that  it  is  my  privi- 
lege to  say  to  any  one  of  my  poor  fellow  creatures  whom 
I  may  find  living  in  sin,  that  if  he  will  repent  he  may 
live,  may  be  saved.  More  than  this  God  has  never 
authorized  me  to  say.  If  my  friend  has  authority  to  go 
beyond  this,  and  tell  him  who  is  persisting  in  sin  that  he 
is  sure  of  a  glorious  immortality,  of  eternal  bliss,  even 
though  he  lives  on  and  finally  dies  in  his  sins,  I  must 
beg  the  privilege  of  expressing  my  conviction  that  such 
authority  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Bible.  I  do  not 
believe  that  God  has  authorized  any  man  so  to  preach. 
Such  preaching,  I  repeat,  Is,  in  my  judgment,  most 
wretchedly  licentious,  being  calculated  to  do  no  possible 
good,  but  greatly  to  strengthen  the  hands  of  the  wicked 
— promising^  as  it  does,  where  God  has  not  promised. 
And  as  the  gentleman  says  he  does  not — and  I  would 
not  say  he  does — "wish  to  blot  out  the  line  between 
christians  and  aliens,  but  to  convert  aliens  into  christ- 
ians," I  submit  for  his  prayerful  consideration  that  he 
will  succeed  better  on  the  Gospel  plan  than  on  his.  Paul 
labored  "  to  convert  aliens  into  christians,"  but  he  did  it 
by  preaching  that  God  "  now  commands  all  men  every- 
where to  repent^  because  he  hath  appointed  a  day  In  the 
which  he  will  judge  the  world  In  righteousness,  by  that 
man  whom  he  hath  ordained."  When  and  where  did 
Paul  put  in  an  hour  trying  to  prove  from  some  Psalm 
or  some  chapter  In  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  that  "  all 
who  leave  this  world  sinful  will  finally  be  reconciled  to 
God,  and  saved  "  ?  To  Imagine  that  apostle  so  preaching 
would  be  a  seeming  ridicule  of  his  whole  ministry. 

The  gentleman  will  have  it  that  I  make  "  God  per- 
petuate sin,  wrong,  vengeance,  wrath,  and  the  whole 


Universal  Salvation,  189 

catalogue  of  crimes,  eternally."  Have  I  said  that  God 
will  perpetuate  sin  ?  I  do  not  believe  God  is  the  author 
of  sin.  That  is  one  of  the  most  objectionable  doctrines 
of  Universalism.  Sin  is  in  the  world.  This  I  know. 
This  even  my  opponent  has  departed  far  enough  from 
the  Universalist  fathers  to  admit.  Sin  and  "the  whole 
catalogue  of  cinmes"  have  been  perpetuated  here  for 
several  thousand  years,  and  yet  I  have  never  believed 
that  God  perpetuates  them.  And  yet,  simply  because  I 
cannot  agree  with  the  learned  gentleman  that  death  and 
the  resurrection  will  annihilate  sin  and  "  the  whole  cata- 
logue of  crimes,"  he  turns  about  and  accuses  me  of  teach- 
ing that  God  will  perpetuate  them  eternally !  But  as  I 
do  not  believe  that  death,  or  the  resurrection,  or  both,  will 
regenerate  my  soul  and  prepare  it  for  tlie  society  of  Jesus 
and  the  angels,  I  dare  not  say  "  he  knew  he  was  bearing 
false  witness  against  his  neighbor;"  but  I  will  venture 
to  say  he  does  me  great  injustice. 

As  the  gentleman  seems  much  inclined  to  "forgive" 
me,  I  shall  ask  him  to  forgive  me  if  he  thinks  I  wrong 
him  v/hen  I  say  his  is  a  very  loose  theology.  '  At  one 
time  he  seems  to  be;  contending  for  taking  "all  sinners 
into  heaven,  and  then  all  hands  go  to  work  and  make 
good  men  and  women  of  them;"  and  then  in  almost 
the  next  breath  he  has  all  raised  from  the  dead  "in 
Christ,"  and  hence  new  creatures.  If  death,  or  the 
resurrection,  shall  regenerate  all,  bring  all  into  Christ 
morally  and  sioiritually,  make  all  new  creatures,  there 
will  remain  none  to  be  evangelized  in  heaven — unless 
we  get  to  heaven  before  the  resurrection !  The  gentle- 
man seems  easily  pleased  as  to  the  how  of  the  matter. 
He  seems  neither  to  care  nor  to  know  anything  about 
how  all  shall  be  saved.     He  is  certain  only  of  one  thing, 


190  Oral  Discussion. 

and  that  is  that  "  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will 
finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved"!  He  talks 
about  there  being  many  things  I  "don't  know."  Well, 
he  thinks  he  knows  one  thing,  and  that  is  about  all  he 
pretends  to  know.  He  thinks  he  knows  that  such  as 
leave  this  world  sinful  will  be  saved;  but  seems  not  to 
know  whether  "death,"  or  the  "resurrection,"  or  "one 
glimpse  of  the  glory  of  the  upper  world,"  or  "  all  hands  " 
after  they  get  into  heaven,  will  save  them !  And  then 
the  gentleman  turns  about  and  tells  us,  "heaven  is  in  the 
soul."  Indeed !  Then  I  suppose  we  should  read,  "  Our 
Father  who  art  in  the  souV^  1 — "Caught  up  into  the 
tliird  soul"  ! — "  Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  according  to  his  abundant  mercy, 
hath  begotten  us  again  unto  a  lively  hope,  by  the  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead,  to  an  inheritance 
incorruptible,  and  undefiled,  and  that  fadeth  not  away, 
reserved  in  the  soul  for  you  " ! !  Then  when  Peter  said 
of  Jesus,  "whom  the  heaven  must  receive  until  the  times 
of  restitution  of  all  things,  etc.,"  he  of  course  meant 
"whom  the  soul  must  receive,  etc."  And  now  how 
much  difference  is  there  between  my  opponent  and  an 
atheist?  He  has  brought  "everlasting  punishment," 
*' everlasting  life,"  "hell,"  and  "heaven,"  all  into  this 
world.  He  continually  sports  with  the  notion  of  there 
being  a  "devil,"  and  calls  Jesus  a  "colossal  man'^  He 
docs  not  believe  there  are  any  fallen  angels;  and  I  sup- 
pose if  his  theory  of  the  reconciliation  and  salvation  of 
all  who  leave  this  world  sinful,  were  in  his  judgment  to 
require  him  to  do  so,  he  would  deny  that  there  are  any 
good  angels,  apart  from  men  and  women,  or  any  God 
independently  of  the  universe.  Well,  the  gentleman  is 
growing  more  and  more  consistent  all  the  time.     If  all 


Universal  Salvation.  191 

the  "hell"  and  "everlasting  punishment"  of  the  Bible 
can  be  brought  into  this  life  and  into  this  world,  why 
not  all  the  "  heaven "  and  " everlasting  life"?  To  this 
Univcrsalism  is  pushed.  I  am  quite  certain  the  gentleman 
is  wrong,  however,  in  representing  the  Savior  and  ?aul 
as  teaching  that  there  are  "  tsiany  heavens  "  "  in  the  spirit- 
tvorld."  Jesus  said,  "in  my  Father's  house  there  are 
many  rnafisions" — not  "heavens."  Paul  spoke  of  the 
"third  heaven,"  it  is  true,  but  he  did  not  say  that  the 
first  and  second  are  "/«  the  spirit-world."  This  doctrine 
of  "many  heavens"  in  the  spirit-world,  made  by  "the 
condition  of  the  soul,"  is  not  scripture  doctrine.  Neither 
is  it  old  fashioned  Univcrsalism.  It  is  modern  Spiritism. 
It  comes  from  the  spirits  that  tip  and  knock  tables,  and 
write  on  slates,  in  the  dark. 

The  gentleman  wishes  to  know  "whom  we  are  debat- 
ing about,"  if  not  about  "  the  nations."  Well,  I  submit 
that  our  proposition  relates  to  "  all  who  leave  this  world 
sinful;"  and  not  to  "nations  of  the  earth."  The  fact 
that  the  "promise  to  the  fathers,"  promises  blessing  to  the 
nations,  kindreds  and  families  of  the  earth,  shows  that 
my  friend  makes  an  unwarranted  use  of  it  when  he  uses 
it  to  prove  the  final  reconciliation  and  salvation  of  all 
who  leave  this  world  sinful.  Morever,  he  has  admitted 
that  the  blessing  of  the  promise  made  to  the  fathers  is 
conditional,  and  that  men  inay  or  may  not  comply  with 
the  conditions,  as  they  choose ;  and  these  admissions  pre- 
clude the  possibility  of  his  proving  his  proposition  by  the 
"promise  to  the  fathers."  The  gentleman,  however, 
seems  to  think  there  will  be  nations  in  heaven,  and  that 
our  "family'  ties  will  survive  death."  If  so,  there  will  be 
polygamy  there.  Perhaps  the  gentleman  would  have 
given  the  Sadducees,  who  came  to  the  Savior  with  the 


192 


Oral  Discussion. 


case  of  the  seven  brothers  who  had  one  wife  in  this  world, 
another  answer  than  that  given  by  the  Savior.  How 
would  he  meet  the  difficulty?  All  "family  ties"  grow 
out  of  the  marital  relation,  and  as  he  thinks  they  "will 
survive  death,"  how  will  he  meet  the  difficult  question 
the  Sadducees  propounded  to  the  Savior! 

My  friend  seems  to  have  understood  me  to  admit  that 
all  mankind  will  be  made  alive  "  in  Christ,"  allowing, 
as  he  assumes,  that  "in  Christ"  indicates  moral  state^  or 
condition.  This,  I  did  not  admit.  I  think  I  stated  ex- 
plicitly that  I  understood  the  phrases  "in  Adam"  and 
"in  Christ"  to  indicate  agencies^  and  not  jnoral  states. 
Some  critics  translate  those  phrases,  "  by  Adam,"  and 
"<5y  Christ."  What  is  there,  I  repeat,  in  dying,  or  in 
the  raising  of  the  body  from  the  grave,  to  renew  the 
soul.'*  Will  the  gentleman  say  there  is  one  half  hour 
between  a  man's  death  and  his  resurrection?  I  think 
not.  Certainly  not,  if  he  is  a  sound  Universalist.  Will 
he  then  say  that  in  passing  out  of  the  body  the  soul 
passes  into  Christ,  and  is  a  new  creature,  old  things 
being  passed  away  and  all  things  become  new? 

I  did  not  say,  as  my  friend  represented  me,  that  Paul 
tau"-ht  that  the  bodies  of  wicked  men  would  be  raised 
incorruptible.  I  think  I  said  as  plainly  as  I  could  that 
in  that  portion  of  the  chapter  in  which  he  spoke  of  the 
resurrection  to  incorruptibility,  the  apostle  was  speaking 
of  the  "resurrection  of  the  just" — of  " them  that  are 
Christ's."  But  the  gentleman  says,  "the  truth  is,  the 
apostle  speaks  of  the  resurrection  of  the  whole  man^^ 
Indeed!  and  is  my  friend  a  soul-sleeper?  He  talks  like 
one.  Does  the  "whole  man"  go  to  the  grave?  Will 
the  worthy  gentleman  answer  affirmatively?  I  think 
not.     Does  he  believe  the  body  will  ever  be  raised  from 


Universal  Salvation.  193 

the  grave  at  all?  This  is  a  simple  question.  I  desire 
an  unequivocal  ansv^^er.  Can  I  have  it?  I  do  not 
believe  the  gentleman  believes  the  body  w^ill  ever  be 
raised  at  all,  and,  therefore,  I  have  pressed  the  question 
upon  him,  w/za/f  is  the  resurrection?  He  repeats  the 
passage — "  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the  earthy, 
w^e  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly."  What 
image  does  he  understand  the  apostle  to  speak  of.''  My 
position  here  is  unequivocal.  I  say  he  does  not  speak 
of  morale  but  of  bodily  image,  and  speaks  to  and  of 
christians. 

XXI.  "  For  Christ  also  hath  once  suffered  for  sins, 
the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God, 
being  put  to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  by  the 
spirit:  by  which  also  he  went  and  preached  unto  the 
spirits  in  prison:  which  sometime  were  disobedient, 
when  once  the  long-suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days 
of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  preparing,  wherein  few, 
that  is,  eight  souls,  were  saved  by  water."  i  Peter  iii. 
18-20.  This  passage  speaks  of  "spirits  in  prison." 
Does  the  gentleman  admit  that  there  are  "  spirits  in 
prison"  in  tlie  future  world .''  If  so,  the  admission  upsets 
Universalism !  The  passage  does  not  say  the  preaching 
was  done  in  the  spirit-xvorld^  but  rather  that  it  was  done 
"in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  preparing,"  to 
persons  who  were  at  the  time  of  Peter's  writing  "  spirits 
in  prison."  They  were  "in  prison"  because  they  had 
not  obeyed  ■when  they  were  preached  to  in  the  days  of 
Noah.  "The  Lord  knoweth  how  to  deliver  the  godly 
out  of  temptation,  and  to  resen^e  the  unjust  [in  prison] 
unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished."  But  sup- 
pose I  admit  that  Jesus  went  and  preached  to  the  spirits 
in  prison  when  he  was  put  to  death,  and  that  there  is  a 
17 


194  Oral   Discussion. 

post  mortem  gospel  now  preached  to  the  dead  —  which, 
of  course,  cannot  be  proved  —  does  the  truth  of  my 
friend's  proposition  follow  ?  By  no  means.  Do  we 
know  that  all  the  spirits  in  prison  would  accept 
the  gospel?  Certainly  not.  If  it  be  granted  that 
the  gospel  is  preached  to  the  dead — to  those  who 
heard  as  well  as  those  who  ne\er  heard  it  here — 
it  cannot  be  proved  that  they  will  all  accept  it.  And 
again,  if  it  be  granted  that  the  gospel  is  preached  to 
those  who  died  without  hearing  it  here,  that  they  may 
be  judged  according  to  men  who  hear  it  in  the  flesh,  it 
does  not  follow  that  it  will  be  preached  again  to  those 
who  heard  it  while  in  the  flesh.  There  is,  therefore,  noth- 
ing in  these  passages  of  scripture  that  joroves  that  "  all  who 
leave  this  world  sinful  will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God, 
and  saved."  I  would  have  you  obsci"ve,  however,  before 
passing  this  argument,  that  neither  of  the  passages 
quoted  says  that  the  gospel  is  preached  to  men  in  the 
spirit- world.  "  For  this  cause  U'a5  the  gospel  preached 
to  them  [while  they  w^ere  living]  that  are  [now]  dead," 
says  the  latter  passage.  It  does  not  say  the  gospel  is 
preached  to  the  dead. 

XXII.  The  gentleman  said  "twenty-second,"  and 
then  read  a  few  verses  from  the  forty-second  chapter  of 
the  prophecy  of  Isaiah !  What  was  there  in  what  he 
read  that  sounded  like  his  proposition.^  Jii^t  nothing. 
I  need  not,  therefore,  spend  my  time  on  his  twenty-sec- 
ond argument,  as  he  calls  it.  All  any  of  you  have  to 
do  to  satisfy  yourselves  that  his  proposition  has  no  sup- 
port in  that  chapter,  is  simply  to  read  the  whole  chapter. 

XXIII.  The  gentleman's  twent}'-third  argument  is 
a  quotation  from  Isaiah,  Ixi.  i.  I  will  read  the  verse, 
and  the  one  following:  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  God  is 


Universal  Salvation.  19c 

upon  me ;  because  the  Lord  hath  anointed  me  to  preach 
good  tidings  unto  the  meek;  he  hath  t;ent  me  to  bind  up 
the  broken-hearted,  to  proclaim  Hbcrty  to  the  captives, 
and  tlie  opening  of  the  prison  to  them  that  are  bound; 
to  prochiim  tlie  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,  and  the  day 
of  vengeance  of  our  God;  to  comfort  all  that  mourn." 
What  is  there  here  that  proves  that  "  all  who  leave  this 
world  sinful  will  finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and 
saved"?  Yes,  "Jesus  quoted  this  passage  (Luke  iv. 
18,)  and  said,  '  This  day  is  this  scripture  fulfilled  in 
your  ears.' "  And  w^hy  does  Mr.  Manford  refer  it  to  the 
immortal  world  for  its  fulfillment.''  He  assumes  that 
the  work  commenced  by  Jesus  will  be  carried  over  into 
the  eternal  world,  and  that  all  who  reject  and  despise  his 
ministry  here  will  certainly  receive  it  there,  and  be  saved. 
The  gentleman  seems  not  to  have  learned  that  there  is 
some  difference  between  seeking  and  recovering  a  "piece 
of  silver,"  or  a  "  sheep,"  and  seeking  and  saving  sinners. 
When  the  woman  found  her  lost  piece  of  silver  she  had 
nothing  to  do  but  pick  it  up  and  pocket  it.  And  when 
the  shepherd  found  his  lost  sheep  he  had  nothing  to  do 
but  to  put  forth  physical  force  enough  to  shoulder  it  up 
and  cany  it  home.  But  is  this  the  way  Jesus  saves  sin- 
ners.'' Does  he  propose  to  carry  them  to  heaven  on  his 
shoulder,  as  the  shepherd  does  his  lost  sheep.'*!  Is 
that  the  way  my  friend  thinks  those  who  leave  this 
world  sinful  will  be  reconciled,  and  saved  }  Surely  not. 
I  do  not  see  why  all  heaven  should  be  eternally  dissatis- 
fied because  some  men  will  not  be  saved.''  I  believe 
that  Jesus  "shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and  shall 
be  satisfied  " — "  satisfied,"  too,  without  taking  to  heaven 
such  as  deliberately  spurn  his  love,  despise  his  blood,  do 
despite  to  the  spirit  of  grace,  and  die  in  their  sins. 


196  Oral  Discussion. 

XXIV,  The  twenty-fourth  argument  is  drawn  from 
PhiHp.  ii.  9-13.  "Wherefore  God  also  hath  highly- 
exalted  him,  and  given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every 
name :  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow, 
of  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth,  and  things 
under  the  earth;  and  that  every  tongue  should  confess 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father. 
Wherefore,  my  beloved,  as  ye  have  always  obeyed,  not 
as  in  my  presence  onl}^,  but  now  much  more  in  my 
absence,  work  out  your  own  salvation  with  fear  and 
ti'einbling.  For  it  is  God  which  worketh  in  you  both  to 
will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure."  This  passage 
simply  says,  that  every  '•'•'k.nQ.e.  should  bow"  to  Jesus,  and 
that  "every  tongue  should  confess"  that  he  is  the  Christ, 
to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father.  But  men  do  not  do 
everything  that  they  should  do  to  the  glorv  of  God  the 
Father,  and  hence  "come  short  of  glorifying  God." 
True,  the  apostle  exhorted  the  disciples  at  Philippi  to 
"workout"  their  "  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trem- 
bling," and  told  them  that  God  was  working  in  them  to 
will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleastn-e.  But  he  did  not 
tell  them  that  they  were  all  sure  of  salvation;  that  it 
was  impossible  for  any  to  fail  of  it;  that  there  need, 
therefore,  be  no  fear  and  trembling  about  the  matter,  or 
even  anxious  concern.  True,  he  told  them  that  God 
was  w^orking  in  them  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good 
pleasure.  But  he  did  not  say  God  was  working  in  all 
men,  regardless  of  their  wills,  to  will  and  to  do  of  his 
good  pleasure,  or  that  he  ever  would  so  work,  in  this  life, 
or,  failing  here,  in  the  life  to  come.  This  passage  is  in 
one  respect  jDrecisely  like  all  the  gentleman  has  quoted 
— it  contains  no  support  for  his  proposition. 

XXV.  The    gentleman's    twenty-fifth   argument    is 


Universal  Salvation.  197 

drawn  from  3  Cor.  v.  17-20.  "Therefore,  if  any  man 
be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature:  old  things  are  passed 
away;  behold,  all  things  are  become  new.  And  all 
things  are  of  God,  who  hath  reconciled  us  to  himself  by 
Jesus  Christ,  and  hath  given  to  us  the  ministiy  of  recon- 
ciliation; to  wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the 
world  unto  himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto 
them ;  and  hath  committed  unto  us  the  word  of  recon- 
ciliation. Now  then  we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ, 
as  though  God  did  beseech  by  us,  we  pray  in  Christ's 
stead :  Be  ye  reconciled  to  God."  Why  did  the  gentle- 
man quote  this  passage.?  Is  there  anything  in  it  about 
those  who  leave  this  world  sinful.''  I  believe  that 
"if  any  man  be  in  Christ  he  is  a  new  creature" — of 
course  I  do.  I  believe,  also,  that  God  reconciled  the 
first  christians  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ.  And  I  believe 
the  apostles  were  "  ambassadors  for  Christ,"  and  that  to 
them  was  committed  the  ministry  of  reconciliation ;  "  to 
wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto 
himself."  I  believe  he  is  still  in  Christ  reconciling  the 
world  unto  himself.  But  what  is  there  here  about  those 
who  leave  this  world  unreconciled  and  sinful.'*  Many 
men  even  in  this  world,  where  the  word  of  reconciliation 
is  preached,  refuse  to  "be  reconciled  to  God,"  thouo-h 
God  beseeches  them  all  their  lives.  So  it  may  be  eter- 
nally, even  if  God  follows  and  beseeches  the  sinner 
eternally — which  he  will  certainly  not  do. 

But  the  gentleman  refers  also  to  Col.  i.  16-21.  "For 
by  him  were  all  things  created,  that  are  in  heaven,  and 
that  are  in  earth,  visible  and  invisible,  whether  thev  be 
thrones,  or  dominions,  or  principalities,  or  powers:  all 
things  were  created  by  him,  and  for  him:  and  he  is 
before  all  things,  and  by  him  all  things  consist.     And 


19^  Oral  Discussion. 

he  is  the  head  of  the  body,  the  church :  who  is  the  be- 
ginning-, the  first-born  from  the  dead ;  that  in  all  things 
he  might  have  the  pre-eminence.  For  it  pleased  the 
Father  that  in  him  should  all  fulness  dwell ;  and,  having 
made  peace  through  the  blood  of  his  cross,  by  him  to 
reconcile  all  things  unto  himself;  by  him,  I  say,  whether 
they  be  things  in  earth,  or  things  in  heaven.  And  you, 
that  were  sometime  alienated  and  enemies  in  your  mind 
by  wicked  works,  yet  now  hath  he  reconciled."  The 
passage  does  not  say  God  will  absolutely  reconcile  all 
things  to  himself;  but,  "  having  made  peace  through  the 
blood  of  his  cross,  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto 
himself" — not,  of  course,  whether  all  things  will  be  re- 
conciled or  not.  The  passage  imports  just  the  same  as 
the  one  just  noticed.  But  while  giving  attention  to  this 
passage,  let  us  read  a  little  more  of  it:  "And  you  that 
were  sometime  alienated  and  enemies  in  your  mind  by 
wicked  works,  yet  now  hath  he  reconciled,  in  the  body 
of  his  flesh  through  death,  to  present  you  holy  and  un- 
blamable and  unreprovable  in  his  sight;  if  ye  continue 
itz  the  faith  grounded  and  settled.,  and  be  not  i7ioved 
away  from  the  hope  of  the  Gospel."  This  part  of  the 
passage  seems  to  have  some  pertinence  to  our  discussion. 
Does  it  teach  as  my  friend  teaches.''  Does  it  teach  that 
the  final  salvation  of  all  men  is  so  certain  that  there 
need  be  no  fear,  as  there  is  no  possibility,  of  any  failing 
to  attain  to  it.''  I  think  not.  What  if  men  xvill  not 
"continue  in  the  faith  grounded  and  settled".?  Will 
they  be  presented  "holy,  and  imblamable,  and  unreprov- 
able" in  the  sight  of  God  anyhoiv? 

XXVI.  Romans  V.  18-3 1.  "Therefore,  as  by  the 
offence  of  one  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condem- 
nation, even  so  by  the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift 


Universal  Salvation.  199 

came  upon  all  men  unto  justification  of  life.  For  as  by 
one  man's  disobedience  many  were  made  sinners,  so  by 
the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be  made  righteous. 
Moreover  the  law  entered,  that  the  offence  might  abound. 
But  where  sin  abounded,  grace  did  much  more  abound : 
that  as  sin  hath  reigned  unto  death,  even  so  might  grace 
reign  through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life,  by  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord."  I  believe  that  as  by  the  ofl'ence  of 
Adam  all  were  condemned  to  die,  so  by  the  righteousness 
of  Christ  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  to  life.  To  the  extent 
that  the  race  die  by  Adam,  the  race  is  restored  to  life  by 
Christ.  The  condemnation  that  came  upon  all  by  the 
offence  of  Adam — be  it  what  it  may — is  removed  by 
Christ,  as  unconditionally  as  it  came.  To  the  extent 
that  the  offence  of  one  man  abounded,  to  that  extent 
the  free  gift  abounds  by  Jesus  Christ.  So  that  no  one 
will  be  condemned  for  the  sin  of  Adam.  That,  with 
all  its  consequences,  came  upon  us  without  our  agency; 
that,  with  all  its  consequences,  Christ  has  removed  with- 
out our  agency.  But  men  commit  actual  transgressions. 
In  this  they  have  some  agency,  and  if  ever  saved  from 
their  own  sins  they  will  have  some  agency  in  the  matter. 
Grace  abounds  to  the  extent  of  Adam's  transgression 
and  its  consequences,  unconditionally,  but  it  "much 
more  abounds."  It  will  also  cover  all  our  actual  trans- 
gressions, if  we  receive  it.  Therefore  the  apostle  says, 
"  They  -which  receive  abundance  of  grace  and  of  the 
gift  of  righteousness  shall  reign  in  life  by  one  Jesus 
Christ."  But  he  does  not  say  all  ivlll  receive  the  abun- 
dance of  grace.  Some,  we  know,  will  not.  [  Time 
expired. 


200  Oral  Disctission. 


[mr.  manford's  eighth  speech.] 

In  the  commencement  of  my  friend's  last  speech,  he 
said,  "  It  is  right  to  desire  the  salvation  of  all  men,  and 
to  labor  for  it."  How  long  is  it  right.''  According 
to  my  friend's  theology,  if  a  man  lives  one  year  it  is 
right  for  him  to  "  desire  the  salvation  of  all  men "  one 
year ;  and  if  he  goes  to  heaven  at  the  end  of  the  year, 
his  "  desire  for  the  salvation  of  all  men  "  must  instantly 
cease,  for  that  christian  desire  will  not  be  tolerated  in 
heaven  one  moment,  and  he  must  glory  in  the  damna- 
tion of  most  of  mankind.  Again  he  says,  "God  so 
desires  the  salvation  of  all  men."  How  long  }  As  long 
as  they  live  in  this  world  Mr.  S.  thinks,  and  no  longer.  If 
a  man  lives  here  one  year,  God  desires  his  salvation  one 
year,  and  not  a  moment  longer.  As  quick  as  the  year  is 
out,  into  hell  he  is  pitched,  and  during  the  length,  breadth 
and  depth  of  eternity,  God  will  not  harbor  the  least 
desire  for  his  salvation.  And  this  he  calls  the  Gospel. 
O,  Gospel!  '•'•what  folly  is  cofnmitted  in  thy  na)nel" 
"  There  is  nothing  enormous  about  all  this,"  he  thinks, 
What,  then,  is  "enormous".''  He  continues,  "What 
would  we  say  of  a  man,  who  said,  that  all  the  sick  will 
get  well  whether  they  use  the  proper  means  of  recovery 
or  not.?"  He  here  means,  that  I  say  all  will  be  saved 
whether  they  use  means  or  not,  when  he  knows  I  do  not 
say  so.  He  then  insinuates,  that  I  contend  a  person  can 
be  saved  without  repentance^  when  he  knows  I  do  not 
so  contend.  Repentance  means  reformation;  and  no 
one  can  be  saved  without  reformation.  He  represents 
me  as  saying  to  the  corrupt,  if  you  go  on  in  sin,  and  die 
in  sin,  God  will  save  you  with  an  everlasting  salvation. 


Universal  Salvation.  201 

Here  he  misrepresents  me  by  omitting  one-half  I  say- 
on  the  subject  of  salvation.  I  say,  no  one  is  saved 
till  he  receives  the  truth,  and  obeys  the  truth.  I  have 
not  said,  that  "death  and  the  resurrection  will  annihi- 
late sin."  He  supposes  I  would  deny  there  is  a  God  if 
I  could  not  otherwise  sustain  my  proposition.  He  repre- 
sents me  as  teaching,  that  God  will  take  the  vilest  of  the 
vile  right  to  heaven,  when  he  hnows  I  do  not  believe  a 
word  of  it.  He  intimates  that  I  say  to  wicked  men, 
you  need  not  be  alarmed  because  of  your  sinful  life,  you 
are  safe,  w^hen  he  hnozvs  I  do  not  say  so.  A  considerable 
portion  of  the  gentleman's  last  speech  was  made  up  of 
these  and  other  misrepresentations.  I  speak  of  these 
things  in  sorrow,  and  hope  my  friend  will  mend  his 
ways.  He  thinks  I  have  a  ''very  loose  theology."  Is 
not  this  loose  talk  "i  He  tells  us,  that  he  does  not  believe 
God  will  perpetuate  "wrath  and  vengeance  eter- 
nally." If  building  an  endless  hell,  and  keeping  it  I'un- 
ning  eternally  is  not  "perpetuating  wrath  and  vengeance 
eternally,"  what  is  it.''  He  laughs  at  the  fact,  that  "the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  within  the  soul,"  when  he  knows 
these  are  the  words  of  Jesus.  I  did  not  say,  that  heaven 
is  only  in  the  soul.  Jesus  did  not  say  so.  I  stated  sub- 
stantially what  all  enlightened  christians  say  on  that 
subject.  A  truly  spiritual  man,  and  a  believer,  too,  in 
endless  punishment,  thus  writes : 

"The  general  idea  of  salvation  is,  that  it  consists  in 
going  to  a  certain  place,  called  heaven.  With  this  place 
is  connected  the  idea  of  being  perfectly  happ\'.  This, 
however,  is  a  veiy  loose  way  of  thinking  on  so  moment- 
ous a  subject.  It  is  not  the  place  that  makes  the  inhabi- 
tants what  they  are,  but  it  is  they  that  make  the  place 
what  it  is.  Heaven  is  what  it  is  because  of  the  charac- 
ter of  those  who  dwell   there.     Any  world  —  any  place 


202  Oral   Discussion. 

would  be  a  heaven,  if  filled  with  perfectly  holy  beings. 
Whether  a  man  is  saved  or  not  depends  on  what  he  is^ 
not  on  where  he  goes.  The  sinner  desires  salvation,  or 
complete  happiness.  He  will  get  it,  not  by  a  change  of 
place,  not  by  going  out  of  the  body,  not  by  getting  into 
the  company  of  the  good,  but  by  getting  I'id  of  his 
moral  malady — by  becoming  holy." 

He  says,  I  "do  not  believe  there  are  fallen  angels." 
If  by  "fallen  angels"  he  means  that  angels  fell  from  the 
city  of  our  God,  and  became  devils,  I  do  not  believe  a 
word  of  it,  for  I  profess  to  be  a  christian^  not  a  heathen. 
I  know  Milton  tells  such  a  story,  and  he  tells  it  grandly, 
but  with  him  it  was  all  ;poetry^  not  fact. 

"  Him  the  Almighty  Power 
Hurl'd  headlong  flaming  from  the  ethereal  skies 
To  bottomless  perdition  ;   there  to  dwell 
In  adamantine  chains  and  penal  fires 
Who  durst  defy  Omnipotence  to  arms. 
Nine  times  the  space  that  measures  day  and  night 
To  mortal  men,  he  with  his  horrid  crew 
Lay  vanquished,  rolling  in  the  fiery  gulf." 

If  the  gentleman  thinks  that  is  all  Gospel,  I  pity  him. 
He  complains  that  I  make  "  sport"  of  his  devil.  I  love  to 
read  Milton's  account  of  him  and  his  doings.  It  is  mag- 
nificent. It  sometimes  amuses  me,  but  I  think  it  never 
makes  me  cry.  Neither  am  I  afraid  of  Mr.  Milton's 
devil.  If  my  brother  believes  in  him  he  must  quake 
inside  and  outside.  He  stoutly  contends  that  the  Gospel 
promise,  that  "  all  nations  whom  God  has  made,"  "  all 
families  of  the  earth,"  "all  kindreds  of  the  earth,"  shall 
be  "blessed  in  Christ,"  shall  "come  and  worship  before 
God  and  glorify  his  name,"  does  not  mean  all  families, 
kindreds,  etc.,  but  a  small  part  of  them.  He  gets  this 
important  information,  I  suppose,  from  the  dictionary 


Universal  Salvation.  203 

that  defines  "shall"  to  mean  nothing;  "still,"  eternity; 
"  quickly  "  and  "  at  hand,"  ten  thousand  years.  I  would 
like  to  see  his  dictionary.  It  must  be  a  curiosity. 
Wonder  if  "D'Israeli's  Curiosities  of  Literature"  does 
not  mention  it.  This  Bible  language  means  all  mankind, 
if  it  means  anything.  See  how  carefully  the  passages 
are  worded.  It  is  not  simply  all  nations,  but  all  nations 
whom  God  has  made;  not  all  families,  but  all  families 
of  the  earth;  not  all  kindreds  merely,  but  all  kindreds 
of  the  earth.  How  clear  the  language  is.  All  nations 
whom  God  has  made;  all  fomilies  of  all  nations;  all 
kindreds  of  all  families.  This  is  the  sum  of  it:  every 
individual  that  ever  did  live,  or  ever  shall  live  on  the 
earth,  shall  be  blessed  in  Christ,  come  and  worship 
God,  and  glorify  his  name.  I  have  requested  him  to 
name  a  person  who  is  not  here  included.  He  has  not, 
and  cannot,  do  it.  Mr.  Campbell  cites  this  Promise,  and 
comments  thus  on  it: 

"  I  will  make  of  thee  a  great  nation,  and  I  will  bless 
thee  and  make  thy  name  great,  and  thou  shalt  be  a  bles- 
sing. I  will  bless  them  that  bless  thee,  and  curse  them 
that  curse  thee. 

"  In  thee  shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed. 

"  These  promises,  when  fully  developed,  contained 
numerous  blessings.  They  are,  however,  in  all  their 
details,  separate  and  distinct  from  each  other.  Abra- 
ham's fomily  alone  are  personally  concerned  in  the  first 
—ALL  FAMILIES  OF  THE  EARTH  in  the  second. 

Temporal  and  earthly  are  the  blessings  of  the  former 

SPIRITUAL  and  ETERNAL  are  the  blessings  of  the 
latter.  Paul  calls  the  second,  '  The  Gospel  preached  to 
Abraham,'  and  'The  covenant  confirmed  by  God  in 
reference  to  the  Messiah,  four  hundred  and  thirty  years 
before  the  giving  of  the  law.'  The  Jewish  kingdom  in 
all  its  glory  was  but  the  development  of  the  first  —  the 
Christian  kingdom  in   its  present  and  future  bless- 


204  Oral  Discission. 

INGS  is  the  consummation  of  tlie  second."     Christian 
Sy stein ^  p.  134. 

I  heartily  recommend  this  passage  to  the  candid  atten- 
tion of  my  worthy  friend.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke  para- 
phrases this  Abrahamic  promise  thus : 

"  In  thy  posterity',  in  the  Messiah,  who  shall  spring 
from  thee,  shall  all  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed ;  for 
as  he  shall  taste  death  for  every  man,  his  Gospel  shall 
be  preached  throughout  the  world,  and  innumerable 
blessings  be  derived  on  ALL  MANKIND,  through 
his  death  and  intercession." 

The  gi-eat  Methodist  commentator  asserts,  that  all 
nations,  families  and  kindreds,  mean  all  mankind — just 
what  I  have  said.  All  mankind,  then,  are  to  be  blessed 
in  Christ.  It  is  true,  that  all  nations,  etc.,  do  not 
always,  in  the  Bible,  mean  all  mankind.  Nobody  pre- 
tends they  do.  Words  have  various  meanings  in  the 
Bible  as  well  as  in  other  books,  and  we  must  determine 
their  meaning  by  the  subject  of  discourse,  and  the  con- 
text. Mr.  Campbell  and  Dr.  Clarke,  by  such  means, 
conclude  those  words  here  mean  all  mankind^  and  with- 
out doubt  they  are  right. 

The  gentleman  tells  us,  that  "family  ties"  will  not 
survive  death.  This  Promise  asserts  nothing  for  or 
against  that  view.  It  simply  teaches,  that  all  who  live 
on  earth  shall  finally  live  in  heaven.  But  my  brother  is 
alarmed.  He  thinks,  if  "family  ties  survive  death, 
there  will  be  polygamy  in  heaven."  If  there  was  a 
"rebellion"  there  once,  as  he  seems  to  think,  there  may 
be  "polygamy"  there.  It  is  sometimes  said,  that  the 
fires  of  hell  are  kept  up  to  keep  heaven  in  subjection. 
If  that  evangelical  notion  is  correct,  and   the  fireman 


(Jniversal  Salvation.  205 

should  fall  asleep,  and  so  the  furnace  cool  off,  there  Is  no 
knowing  what  would  be  done  in  "  heaven."  The  gen- 
tleman's fears  might  be  realized.  Whether  family  ties 
survive  death  is  more  than  I  profess  to  know;  but  I 
must  think,  that  the  loves  of  earth  will  survive  the  shock 
of  death,  and  on  the  heavenly  shore  be  purified  and 
sanctified.  I  love,  also,  to  cherish  the  thought,  that  every 
soul  is  mated  when  created.  These  tTJoht  souls  may  not 
meet  on  earth,  but  they  will  in  heaven. 

"As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive."  The  brother  wants  to  take  the  word  iri  out 
of  this  blessed  passage,  and  put  in  by.  He  thinks  that 
little  tinkering  will  help  him  and  his  cause.  Suppose  we 
let  him  do  so.  As  we  have  before  seen,  the  apostle 
says,  "There  is  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are 
in  Christ."  "To  be  in  Christ  is  to  be  a  new  crea- 
ture," etc.  Now  substitute  by  for  in  in  these  verses, 
and  you  will  see  that  the  meaning  of  the  text  is  not 
changed  by  the  alteration.  All  mankind  will  be  made 
alive  by  Christ;  and  "There  is  no  condemnation  to  them 
that  arc  by  Christ,"  and  "  To  be  by  Christ  is  to  be  a  new 
creature."  If  we  substitute  by  for  /«,  the  great  apostle  still 
teaches,  that  all  mankind  will  be  delivered  by  Christy 
redeemed  by  Christ.,  saved  by  Christ.  He  might  as  well 
let  the  passage  stand  as  it  reads.  IN  CHRIST,  then, 
all  will  be  made  alive. 

The  brother  wants  to  know  what  I  mean  by  the 
"whole  man"  that  is  to  be  raised  and  blessed  in  or  by 
Christ.  I  mean  the  man  made  "in  the  image  of  God; 
I  mean  the  man  that  comes  from  God,  and  will  return 
to  him  when  the  body  dies.  Is  that  answer  "  unequivocal 
enough.^  That  is  the  real  man.,  and  Jesus  will  quicken 
all  made  in  God's  image  into  spiritual  life. 


I) 


^ 


2o6  Oral  Discussion. 

The  spirits  in  prison.  The  gentleman  misunderstands 
me  here.  I  said,  this  passage  teaches,  that  God's  mercy- 
extends  to  spirits  in  prison,  let  that  prison  be  where  it 
may,  in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come.  That  is 
what  I  said,  and  that  is  what  the  passage  proves.  And 
that  is  just  what  believers  in  endless  woe  deny  with  all 
their  might.  God,  they  say,  has  a  prison  full  of  his  own 
immortal  images,  and  mercy  never  was  offered  them  in 
that  place,  and  never  will  be.  A  terrible  dogma!  Fit 
only  for  a  devil  to  be  the  father  of.  I  did  not  say,  that 
to  the  dead  literally  was  the  Gospel  preached.  But  I 
did  say,  that  wherever  men  are  dead,  effort  is  made  for 
their  salvation.  And  that  is  what  the  passage  proves. 
But  that  is  what  believers  in  endless  woe  deny.  It  was 
to  the  dead  the  Gospel  was  preached,  that  "  they  might 
live  according  to  God  in  the  spirit." 

The  passage  I  read  from  Isaiah  xlii.  teaches  the 
same ;  teaches  that  wherever  men  are  in  darkness,  in 
prison,  whether  in  this  world  or  the  world  to  come, 
God's  mercy  extends  to  them  for  their  deliverance. 
And  that  the  advocates  of  ceaseless  wrath  deny.  The 
gentleman  did  not  attempt  to  show  that  to  be  a  wrong 
view  of  the  passage.  The  same  is  taught  in  Isaiah 
Ixi.  Christ  was  sent  to  liberate  all  captives,  to 
open  all  prisons,  to  break  all  chains.  This  is  also 
denied.  The  prison  of  hell,  it  is  said,  will  never  be 
opened,  except  to  let  in  prisoners,  and  let  out  smoke ;  its 
victims  will  never  be  liberated ;  its  chains  will  never  be 
broken.  All  those  blessed  passages,  that  speak  about 
preaching  to  the  dead,  to  the  spirits  in  pi-ison,  and  of 
opening  all  prisons,  and  of  breaking  all  chains,  prove 
that  God's  arm  is  not  shortened  that  he  cannot  save;  and 
that  even  the  lowest  of  tlie  low  are  within   the  pale  of 


Universal  Salvation.  207 

God's  mercy.  And  I  cannot  understand  why  men 
oppose  so  violently,  so  benevolent  a  view  of  God's  gov- 
ernment. Pope,  perhaps,  gives  the  true  reason  when 
he  says — 

"  Heaven  is  built  on  frldi — Hell  on  spiie.^^ 

Besides,  there  is  much  tiger  blood  in  human  veins,  and 
every  drop  of  it  is  in  favor  of  endless  damnation. 

My  friend  refers  to  Philip,  ii.  and  says,  every  knee 
should  bow  to  Jesus.  But  he  does  not  believe  that.  The 
spirits  in  prison,  he  contends,  will  not  be  alloived  to  bow 
to  Jesus — will  not  be  allowed  to  see  him — will  be  shut 
up  in  hell,  and  all  mercy  shut  outside.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  passage  teaches,  that  all  should  bow  to  Jesus ; 
it  will  be  their  eterjtal-  duty  to  do  so.  And  has  God 
made  it  the  everlasting  duty  of  all  to  bow  to  Jesus,  and 
at  the  same  time  placed  millions  where  they  cannot  do 
so,  and  he  does  not  intend  they  shall }  All  will  finally 
bow  to  Jesus,  and  "  confess  him  to  be  Lord,  to  the  glory 
OF  God  the  Father."  Amen.  All  should  bow  to 
Jesus  now^  and  all  noxv  are  allowed  to.  But  in  the 
prison  of  hell,  it  is  said,  none  can  do  so,  none  will  be 
allowed  to  do  so.  What  a  doctrine  to  be  called  the 
Gospel  1 1 

All  reconciled  to  God.  It  was  the  mission  of  our 
Savior  to  i*econcile  mankind  to  God  —  not  God  to 
mankind  —  and  God  is  in  Christ  effecting  that  work. 
The  Gospel  surely  teaches,  that  God,  through  Jesus,  will 
reconcile  all  things  to  himself;  that  there  will  be  no 
failure  in  this  matter.  Notice  Colossians  i.  16-3 r,  before 
read.  Several  purposes  of  God  are  there  made  known. 
I.  It  was  the  purpose  of  God,  that  Christ  should  be  in 
his  image.  No  failure  there.  2.  That  he  should  be  the 
first-born  of  every  creature.     No  failure  there.     3.  That 


2oS  Oral  Discussion. 

by  him  all  things  should  be  created.  No  failure.  4. 
That  he  should  be  before  all  things.  No  failure.  5. 
The  head  of  the  church.  No  failure,  6.  The  "first- 
born from  the  dead."  No  failure.  7.  In  all  things 
have  the  pre-eminence.  No  failure  yet.  8.  "That  it 
pleased  the  Father  that  in  him  should  all  fulness 
DWELL."  That  will  be  an  awful  failure,  it  is  said.  9. 
"  That  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  to  himself." 
That  will  be  another  big  failure.  It  will  be  seen  that 
God  has  been  successful  in  the  preliminaries.,  but  there 
will  be  almost  a  total  failure  in  the  result — according  to 
Partialism.  All  those  preliminaries  were  adopted  to 
secure  a  certain  end — "the  reconciliation  of  all  things  to 
God."  The  means  were  all  carried  on  successfully,  till 
the  issue  comes,  and  then  and  there  is  an  awful  failure. 
The  devil  put  his/bo/  m,  and  God's  plan  is  ruined!  As 
Robinson  Crusoe's  man  Friday  said,  "  Why  no  kill  the 
devil,"  that  does  so  much  mischief .''  All  partial  schemes 
of  redemption  are  like  perpetual  motion  machines,  they 
are  2X[  failures.  I  must  believe  that  all  things  will  be 
reconciled  to  God,  as  the  plan  was  devised  by  infinite 
wisdom. 

The  gentleman  does  not  deny,  and  he  doubtless  will 
admit,  that  "many"  in  Rom.  v.  19,  means  the  mass  of 
mankind,  all  mankind.  Dr.  Clarke,  Dr.  McKnight,  in 
fact,  all  modern  critics,  contend  for  this.  I  will,  then, 
substitute  all  mankind  for  many,  and  read  the  passage. 
,"For  by  one  man's  disobedience  all  mankind  \\Q.xe.  made 
sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of  one  SHALL  ALL 
MANKIND  BE  MADE  RIGHTEOUS."  If  that 
does  not  teach,  that  all  mankind  will  finally  be  recon- 
ciled to  God,  and  saved,  it  is  impossible  for  that  thought 
to  be  conveyed  in  the  English  language. 


Universal  Salvation.  209 

As  this  is  my  last  speech  on  the  subject  we  have  been 
discussing  these  two  days,  I  will  briefly  refer  to  some  of 
the  arguments  and  proofs  offered  to  sustain  my  proposi- 
tion.    I  affirm,  "  that  all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will 
finally  be  reconciled  to  God,  and  saved"  — saved  from 
the  imperfections  of  this  mortal  state— reconciled  to  God, 
to  truth,  to  virtue.     Alas,  all  of  us,  even  the  best,  need' 
while  in  this  lower  world,  grace  and  salvation.     The 
best  are  not  perfect;  the  purest  have  moral  taints.     All 
have  reason  to  say,  in  the  language  of  the  Episcopal  ser- 
vice, "  O  Lord,  have  mercy  upon  us  miserable  sinners." 
But  Mr.  Sweeney  denies  that  any  who  leave  this  world 
sinners  will  be  saved.     He,  however,  admits  that  most  of 
mankind  depart  this  life  unregenerated.     This  world  was, 
at  least,  four  thousand  years  old  when  Christ  was  born,' 
and  corruption  during  those  ages  generally  prevailed!  " 
Most  of  mankind  lived  and  died   in  sin   and  depravity. 
They  did  not  believe  in  the  true  God,  did   not  worship 
the  true  God,  did  not  obey  the  true  God.     They  lived 
and  died  in  this  condition ;  and   if,  as  my  friend   asserts, 
not  a  soul  can  be  regenerated  in   eternity,  nearly  all  of 
earth's  inhabitants  for  the  first  four  thousand  years,  are 
lost— lost  forever.     He  may  say,  they  did  not  have  much 
light,  and  so  not  much  was  required  of  them.     But  that  is 
not  the  point.     They  died  corrupt,  and  Mr.  S.  denies 
that  such  can  be  saved. 

^  Ninety-nine  one  hundredths  of  mankind,  who  have 
died  since  Christ's  advent,  have  died  corrupt.  Mr.  S. 
denies,  that  any  who  die  corrupt  can  be  saved,  so  that, 
at  least,  ninet3'-nine  of  every  hundred  who  have  died 
since  the  birth  of  Jesus,  are  lost  if  he  is  right.  If  he  is 
correct,  heaven  will  be  almost  empt}^  and  hell  crowded ; 
satan  will  get  nearly  all  mankind,  and  the  Savior  of  the 
iS 


2IO  Oral  Discussion, 

ivorld  (//)  only  one  here  and  there.  This  appalling 
sequence  from  his  negative  is  enough  to  show  he  is 
wrong,  if  there  is  a  God  in  the  universe. 

I  have  contended  that  the  spirit.,  v^diich  is  the  real 
man,  is  a  son  of  God,  and  in  the  image  of  God,  and  I 
am  pleased  to  find,  now  that  I  know  his  notion,  that  my 
friend  has  the  same  exalted  view  of  man's  origin  and 
nature.     In  his  debate  with  Rev.  J.  B.  Logan,  he  says : 

"The  worthy  gentleman,  so  far  from  being  able  to 
prove  that  infants  inherit  spiritual  corruption,  or  spirit- 
ual death,  from  Adam,  can  scarcely  prove  they  even  inherit 
their  spiritual  natures  from  him !  Therefore,  before  he 
undertakes  to  prove  that  we  inherit  depravity  in  our 
spirits.,  from  Adam,  the  gentleman  would  do  well  to 
•^xo\Q.  \\\'3X\\Q.  inherit  our  spirits  ^xo\xi  him;  and  this  a 
work,  I  predict,  he  will  hardly  accomplish.  We  have 
' fathers  of  our  Jlesh'  and  a  ' Father  of  spirits.' 
Paul  says,  '  We  have  had  fathers  of  our  Jlesh  which 
corrected  us,  and  we  give  thein  I'cverence :  shall  we  not 
much  rather  be  in  subjection  to  the  Father  of  spirits  and 
live?'  *  *  *  '■All  souls  are  jnine'  asth.c?,o\.\\o£  i\\Q 
father,  so  also  is  the  soul  of  the  son  mine."     Page  261. 

Again  he  says — 

"  He,  Mr.  Logan,  wants  me  to  tell  when  and  where 
the  infant  gets  its  soul.  But  that  is  his  business.  Let 
him  tell.  I  said,  and  I  repeat  it,  that  God  is  the  '  Father 
OF  SPIRITS.'  Does  the  gentleman  deny  this.''  If  so,  he 
denies  a  proposition  in  Paul's  own  language!  I  say  the 
THE  SPIRIT  COMES  FROM  GoD,  and  at  death,  'the  spirit 

SHALL  RETURN  TO  GOD  WHO  GAVE  IT.'"       Page  276. 

I  was  not  aware  till  to-day,  that  he  denies  we  inherit 
our  spiritual  nature  froin  Adam,  and  contends  it  comes 
directly  from  God,  "  the  Father  of  spirits."  He  is  far  in 
advance  of  Mr,  Campbell;  and  his  view,  I  am  pleased 
to  say,  does  not  involve  infant  depravity  and  damnation, 


Universal  Salvatio7i.  2 1 1 

as  Mr.  C.'s  surely  does.  The  spirit,  then,  of  every  man 
comes  directly  from  God — he  is  the  Father  of  all  spirits. 
And  he  quotes  Solomon  to  show,  that  all  spirits  come 
from  God  the  Father,  and  that  all  spirits  will  return  to 
God  the  Father.  The  spirit  of  Adam  was  from  God, 
therefore  he  is  called  "The  son  of  God,"  (Luke  iii.  28,) 
and  hence  it  is  said  he  was  in  the  "image  of  God."  So 
all  spirits  come  from  God,  and  are,  consequently,  "  sons 
of  God,  in  the  image  of  God,"  and  shall  return  to  God. 
Mr.  S.  does  not  mean,  neither  do  I,  that  all  mankind  are 
God's  children  morally^  or  that  all  are  in  his  moral 
image,  but  our  spiritual  nature^  not  character,  is  the 
offspring  of  God,  and  in  the  image  of  God.  Thus  far, 
I  am  happy  to  say,  now  I  understand  him,  we  agree. 

Will  man  ever  cease  to  be  a  child  of  God  by 
nature  ?  Will  he  ever  cease  to  be  in  the  image  of  God 
by  7tature?  If  my  friend  says  yes,  then  man  will  no 
longer  be  man,  but  a  brute,  for  being  a  child  of  God, 
being  in  the  image  of  God,  is  what  makes  a  man  a  man. 
Destroy  that  relation,  that  image,  and  he  would  be  noth- 
ing but  a  brute — not  a  moral  agent,  not  accountable — 
not  a  subject  of  praise  or  blame,  or  of  rewards  or  pun- 
ishments— and,  being  a  brute,  annihilation  would  be  his 
doom,  not  endless  misery,  for  the  endless  misery  of  a 
soul  implies  its  immortality,  and  what  is  7iot  in  God's 
image  is  not  immortal,  and  so  cannot  live  to  suffer  eter- 
nally. As  my  friend  contends  that  millions  of  mankind, 
after  returning  to  God  who  created  them,  will  be  doomed 
to  suffer  endless  torments,  it  will,  in  his  view,  be  God's 
children,  God's  images,  that  will  be  thus  doomed,  and 
that  God  is  constantly  creating  spirits  knowing  that  will 
be  their  doom.  If  a  man  can  believe  all  that,  it  seems 
to  me  he  can  believe  most  anything,  horrible  as  it  may  be. 


213  Oral  Discussion. 

Is  it  not  more  in  harmony  with  the  Love,  Wisdom, 
Mercy,  Justice,  Pleasure,  Desire  and  Will  of  God,  that 
he  should  finally,  through  divine  instrumentalities,  purify 
all  souls,  and  bless  them  forever?  I  have  showed,  that 
the  Nature,  Attributes  and  Government  of  God  give  us 
strong  reason  to  hope,  to  believe,  that  this  will  be  the 
grand  result  of  making  man  in  the  image  of  God, 

Then  God  has  a  Purpose  which  corresponds  with  his 
divine  character.  "  Having  made  known  unto  us  the 
mystery  of  his  will,  according  to  his  good  pleasure, 
which  he  hath  purposed  in  himself  :  that  in  the  dis- 
pensation of  the  fullness  of  times  he  might  gather 
together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are 
in  heaven,  and  which  are  on  earth;  even  in  him." 
Eph.  i.  9,  lo.  Mr.  S.  admitted,  to  use  his  own  words, 
"when  God's  purposes  alone  depend  on  himself  for 
their  performance,  they  will  never  fail."  That  is  the 
exact  chai-acter  of  God's  purpose.  "  Pie  hath  purposed 
IN  himself."  And  the  Bible  says,  "What  he  hath 
purposed  he  will  perform."  He  has  a  purpose  in 
being  "  the  Father  of  spirits."  It  is  a  ^wise  and  holy 
purpose,  and  it  will  not  fail.  As  this  is  so,  we  can 
emphasize  the  inspired  words,  "  All  thy  works  shall 
praise  thee." 

The  "great  and  precious  Promises"  of  the  Bible  have 
been  considered,  and  they  assure  us  that  "all  nations 
whom  God  hath  made,"  "  all  nations,  families  and  kin- 
dreds of  the  earth,"  "shall  come  and  worship  before 
God,"  "  shall  be  blessed  in  Christ,"  that  "  God  may  be 
all  in  all."  Then  will  be  the  "  end  " — the  end  of  sin, 
suffering  and  death — when  all  who  die  in  Adam,  will  be 
made  alive  in  Christ,  eveiy  tongue  shall  confess  that 
Jesus  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father  —  the 


Universal  Salvation.  '  213 

Father  of  all  spirits — and  each  will  say  truly,  "  In  the 
Lord  have  I  righteousness  and  strength."  Then 
the  Savior's  work  will  be  accomplished ;  the  will  of 
God  realized  in  every  soul,  and  all  his  purposes  accom- 
plished. 

I  will  conclude  with  the  words  of  Baron  Humboldt, 
one  of  the  purest  and  most  intellectual  men  of  the 
world,  and  you  will  see  he  refutes  the  calumny  that  the 
belief  that  "  death  is  the  passage  to  a  better  and  higher 
condition"  is  immoral  in  its  influence.  He  found  it 
to  be  the  "ground  of  inward  peace,  and  of  the  loftiest 
endeavors." 

"The  conviction.,  arising  from  a  firm  confidence  in 
Almighty  goodness  and  justice,   that  death  is  only 

THE  TERMINATION  OF  AN  IMPERFECT  STATE  OF  BEING, 
WHOSE  PURPOSES  CANNOT  BE  FULLY  CARRIED  OUT 
HERE,  AND  THAT  IT  IS  A  PASSAGE  TO  A  BETTER  CON- 
DITION, should  be  constantly  before  us,  that  nothing 
'should  be  able  to  obscure  it,  even  for  a  moment;  it  is 

THE  GROUND  WORK  OF  INWARD  PEACE,  AND  OF  THE 
LOFTIEST  ENDEAVORS,  and  is  an  INEXHAUSTIBLE  SPRING 

OF  COMFORT  IN  AFFLICTION."     [  Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  eighth  reply.] 

I  said  in  my  last  speech  that  it  is  right  for  us  to  desire 
and  labor  for  the  salvation  of  all  men,  as  God  so  desires, 
and  has  offered  salvation  to  all.  And  now  the  gentle- 
man asks,  "  How  long  is  it  right?"  Well,  I  suppose  it 
will  be  right  to  so  desire  and  labor  as  long  as  there  is 
any  hope.  True,  we  may  not  infallibly  know  when 
persons  have  gone  so  far  from  God  that  it  is  "  impossible 


ai4  Oral   Discussion. 

to  i^estore  them  to  repentance,"  but  God  knows.  And 
\vhen  he  "  shall  send  them  strong  delusion,  that  they 
may  believe  a  lie;  that  they  all  might  be  damned  who 
believed  not  the  truth,  but  had  pleasure  in  unrighteous- 
ness" (3  Thes.  ii,  II,  12) — when  he  shall  say,  "He  that 
is  unjust  let  him  be  unjust  still,  and  he  that  is  filthy  let 
him  3e  111  thy  still,"  (Rev.  xxii.  11) — when  he  shall  say, 
"Ephraim  is,  Joined  to  idols;  let  him  alone"  (Hos.  iv. 
17) — I  shall  have  to  put  up  with  it.  If  Mr.  Manford 
cannot  go  to  heaven  without  taking  all  who  have  pleas- 
ure in  unrighteousness  rather  than  in  virtue — without 
taking  the  filthy  in  their  filth — without  taking  Ephraim, 
idols  and  all — then  I  suppose  he  will  have  to  go  along 
with  Ephraim.  In  this  life  we  are  authorized  to  invite 
men  to  come  to  the  light,  to  the  truth,  to  righteousness, 
to  holiness,  to  virtue,  to  Christ,  to  God,  to  life,  to  hope; 
but  of  such  as  "  have  pleasure  in  unrighteousness,"  as 
love  filth  and  moral  pollution,  and  die  in  their  sins, 
Christ  said,  "Whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come;"  and  I 
shall  have  to  go  with  them  wherever  they  go,  or  to 
heaven  witJiout  them.  JVIy  friend  seems  to  think  heaven 
cannot  be  heaven  without  them,  while  Jesus  seems  to 
have  decided  that  heaven  cannot  be  heaven  with  them. 
The  gentleman  needs  to  be  reconciled. 

My  opponent  claims  that  I  misrejDresent  him;  and, 
what  is  still  worse,  that  I  do  so  intentionally — that  I  do  so 
when  I  '•''know"  better.  Will  he  allow  me  to  admonish 
him  to  keep  cool.^  I  am  never  well  pleased  with  an 
opponent  that  gets  unduly  excited,  or  waxes  cross.  I 
have  not  aimed  to  misrepresent  him.  Why  should  I } 
When  he  shows  me  wherein  I  misrepresent  him,  I  am 
ready  to  stand  corrected.  He  says  I  misrepresent  him 
when  I  represent  him  as  "saying  to  the  corrupt,  '  If  you 


Universal  Salvation.  215 

go  on  in  sin,  and  die  in  sin,  God  will  save  you  with  an 
everlasting  salvation.' "  Why,  that's  his  proposition ! 
Do  I  misrepresent  him  when  I  hold  that  he  teaches  the 
doctrine  of  the  proposition  he  is  trying  to  prove?  Surely 
not!  But,  then,  he  says  he  does  not  believe  any  will  be 
saved  without  repentance.  Very  well ;  and  have  I  not 
all  along  given  him  credit  for  that?  But  he  does  say 
that  it  will  never  be  too  late  for  a  sinner  to  reform — that 
if  one  docs  not  choose  to  repent  now,  he  can  lay  the 
matter  over  for  just  as  many  millions  of  years  as  he  may 
choose  to  revel  in  sin,  and  if  he  ever  gets  tired  of  sin, 
then  he  can  reform  and  be  saved!  But  what  if  one 
should  eternally  "  have  pleasure  in  unrighteousness "  ? 
Then,  of  course,  his  proposition  will  turn  out  to  be  false. 
But  he  says  all  will  reform.  But  this  is  what  he  does 
not  know,  and  cannot  know.  Here  is  where  I  called 
the  gentleman's  doctrine  "  wretchedly  licentious,"  and 
so  I  look  upon  it  still.  Suppose,  for  illustration,  I  go 
into  your  streets  to  preach  temperance  to  the  poor,  un- 
fortunate man,  who  is  almost  habit-bound  in  drunken- 
ness, and  tell  him :  "  Sir,  while  it  would  be  every  way 
better  for  you  to  reform,  and  to  reform  now,  nevertheless, 
if  you  love  your  dram  and  drunken  associates  better 
than  decent  society,  you  need  not  be  alarn:ied  by  any 
silly  temperance  lecturer,  who  may,  in  his  blind  zeal, 
tell  you  that  it  may  be  too  late,  by  and  by,  for  you  to 
reform :  I  say  unto  you,  it  will  never  be  too  late.  You 
will  always  be  able  to  reform.  Moreover,  you  will,  one 
day,  be  absolutely  certain  to  do  it — about  that  you  may 
have  no  fears."  What  would  you  say  to  such  a  tem- 
perance lecture?  What  would  Universalists  say  to  it? 
Would  anybody  call  that  a  good  temperance  lecture — 
one  calculated  to  prove  reformatory  of  the  drunkard? 


2i6  Oral  Discussion. 

I  appeal  to  you,  fathers  and  mothers — would  you  like  to 
have  me  so  talk  to  your  son,  were  he  acquiring  the  habit 
of  dram  drinking,  or  any  other  bad  habit?  I  know  you 
would  not.  You  would  rightly  call  such  teaching  im- 
moral and  licentious.  And  yet  it  seems  to  me  that  it  is 
UniversaJism,  as  represented  by  my  worthy  friend  in  this 
discussion.  But,  my  friends,  it  is  not  the  Gospel.  It  is 
not  like  the  Gospel.  It  is  not  akin  to  the  Gospel.  "  O, 
Gospel!  what  folly  is  committed  in  thy  name!"  and  I 
may  add,  that  "folly"  is  no  name  for  much  that 
is  called  Gospel.  It  is  true  that  the  "love  of  God"  is 
revealed  in  the  Gospel;  and  it  is  also  true  that  therein 
"  the  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all 
ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men,  who  hold  the 
truth  in  unrighteousness."     Rom.  i.  i8. 

The  gentleman  represents  me  as  laughing  "  at  the 
fact,  that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  within  the  soul." 
He  mistakes  me.  I  believe  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is 
within  the  soul  of  the  christian.  Of  course  I  do.  That 
is,  I  believe  its  principles  are.  Until  these  are  in  the 
soul  of  a  man,  the  man  is  not  fit  to  be  in  the  kingdom. 
But  I  believe  there  is  a  heaven^  where  God  is,  and  where 
Jesus  is,  and  where  angels  arc;  and  where  flesh  and 
blood  can  never  go.  Nor  do  I  believe  that  that  heaven 
is  in  the  soul.  The  love  of  it  may  be  in  the  soul — yea, 
inust  be  in  the  soul,  or  the  soul  can  never  be  in  heaven. 
Hence,  I  reject  Universalism.  The  gentleman  backed 
down,  in  his  last  speech,  from  the  ground  I  luiderstood 
him  to  assume  in  the  former  one,  on  this  point. 

The  gentleman  is  "  a  christian,  not  a  heathen;"  and, 
therefore,  does  not  believe  all  that  Milton  said  about 
fallen  angels  and  hell.  But  I  have  not  asked  him  to 
believe  what   Milton  said.      I  would   be   much  better 


Universal  Salvation.  217 

satisfied  with  his  faith  than  I  am  if  it  only  took  in  all 
the  Bible  says  on  these  questions.     But  he  continually 
sports  with  Bible  language  upon  these  matters.      True 
he  calls  it  my  theology,  that  he  may  not  appear  so  skep! 
tical;  but  It  IS  plain  scripture  language  that  he  ridicules. 
I  can  but  think  of  the  story  of  the  African  servant,  who, 
when  his  master  called  him  a  "black  rascal,"  replied • 
"Master,  I  admit  all  you  say,  but  when  Bob  calls  me 
black  rascal,  I  call  him  a  liarr       Mr.   Manford  shifts 
the   Bible   language  that  he  does  not  like  off  on  me 
or   Milton,  or    one   Rev.   Mr.  Zoroaster,  with   whose 
theology  he  seems  quite  conversant,  and  then  says  we  are 
all  heathen  and  false  teachers. 

The  gentleman  quotes  Mr.  Campbell  and  Dr.  Clarke 
on  the   promise    to   Abraham:  "In  thee   shall  all  the 
flxmihes  of  the  earth  be  blessed;"  and  makes  them  both 
out  Universalists!     Well,  this  is  not  to  be  wondered  at, 
after  what  we  have  heard  before.     We  have  heard  him 
time  and  again,  at  least  by  implication,  charge  Univer- 
sahsm  upon  Jesus  and  his  apostles;  and  why  not  charo-e 
It  upon  Mr.   Campbell  and  Dr.   Clarke?     They  never 
more  distinctly  taught  the  reverse,  than  did  Jesus  and 
his  aposdes.     If  Jesus  and  his  apostles  were  Universal- 
ists, so  were  Mr.  Campbell  and  Dr.  Clarke.     On  this 
question   they  all   taught  alike.     And   when  you   hear 
Mr.    Manford    prove    Universalism    by    Campbell    and 
Clarke,  then  you  may  know  how  he  proves  it  by  Jesus 
and  the  apostles.     The  process  is  the  same  in  both  cases 
It  is  done   by  garbling  their   teachings.     I    notice    one 
thing,  however,   that  is  quite  significant;   and   that   is 
tnat  the  gentleman   is  not  quite  satisfied  with  the   lan- 
guage of  the  "  promise,"  or  any  that  Mr.   Campbell   or 
Dr.  Clarke  has  used;  and  hence  he  puts  "the  sum  of 


2i8  Oral  Discussion. 

it"  in  quite  diffci'ent  words.  He  states  it  thus:  "Every 
individual  that  ever  did  live,  or  ever  shall  live,  on  the 
earth,  shall  be  blessed  in  Christ,  come  and  worship  God, 
and  glorify  his  name."  This  is  much  stronger  language 
than  he  found  in  the  Bible.  But  what  need  I  further 
say  of  the  argument  from  the  "promise  to  the  fathers".'* 
Has  he  not  admitted  that  the  blessing  of  that  promise  is 
conditional.,  and  that  one  may  or  not  comply  with  its 
conditions,  as  he  chooses.^  And  with  these  admissions, 
how  can  he  prove  that  all  will  be  saved }  It  is  simply 
impossible  for  him  to  do  it.  Even  Hosea  Ballou,  one 
of  the  greatest  lights  of  the  whole  Univcrsalist  firma- 
ment, has  so  decided,  as  I  have  shown. 

The  gentleman  says,  "  Whether  family  ties  survive 
death  is  more  than  I  profess  to  know."  What  a  great 
change  has  come  over  him !  In  his  former  speech  he  did 
"  profess  to  know " !  And  how  often  has  he  appealed 
to  persons  to  reject  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment, 
because,  if  it  be  true,  there  will  be  broken  tamilies  in 
heaven.  "  Heaven  will  be  made  up  of  remnants  of 
families"!  is  an  exclamation  common  to  Univcrsalist 
preachers,  and  one  over  which  they  have  all  taken  out 
their  pocket-kerchiefs  more  frequently  than  over  all  the 
balance  of  the  woes  of  mankind.  And,  now  the  gentle- 
man does  not  "  profess  to  know  whether  family  ties  will 
survive  death  or  not " !  He  now  only  cherishes  "  the 
thought,  that  every  soul  is  mated  when  created;"  and 
though  "  these  twin  souls  may  not  meet  on  earth,  they 
will  meet  in  heaven."  I  have  nothing  to  say  about  this, 
only  that  the  gentleman  never  got  that  "thought"  from 
the  Bible.  It  is  one  of  the  grand  thoughts  of  the 
"spirits,"  and  has  dissolved  a  good  many  "family  ties," 
even  on  this  side  of  death.  \ 


Universal  Salvation.  2IQ 

"  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive."     I  am  sorry  I  did  not  get  the  gentleman's' 
position,  as  to  the  teaching  of  this  passage,  earlier  in  our 
discussion.     But  that  I  did  not  was  certainly  no  fault  of 
mine.     I  now  understand  him  to  teach  that  » the  whole' 
man"  that  is  to  be  raised  in  Christ,  is  \h(t spirit  of  man: 
in  his  own  words,  "the  man  that  comes  from  God,  and 
Vi'xW  return  to  him  when  the  body  dies."     "  This  "  the 
gentleman  says,  "is  the  real  man,  and  Jesus  will  quicken 
all  made  in  God's  image  into  spiritual  life."     What  the 
gentleman  understands,  then,  by  all  being  made  alive  in 
Christ,  or  by  Christ,  is,  that  all  spirits  will  be  quickened 
"into  spiritual  life "  by  Christ.     Then  I  suppose  Paul 
meant  in  this  passage  to  say,  "  As  in  Adam  all  [spirits] 
die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  [spirits]  be  made  alive"— 
or  quickened  into  spiritual  life!     Is  my  friend  ready  for 
this  reading?     O,  no!     Why  not?     Because  he  does  not 
believe  any  one  dies  a  spiritual  death  in  Adam.     He 
does  not  believe  we  "inherit  our  spiritual  nature  from 
Adam."     You  know  he  was  "not  aware   till   to-day" 
that  I  contend  that  "  the  spirit  comes  from  God,  and  not 
from  Adam."  .  And  in  this  matter  he  tells  you  that  I  am 
"  far  in  advance  of  Mr.  Campbell."     Indeed,  he  said,  in 
so  many  words,  "The  spirit,  then,  of  every  man  comes 
directly   from   God."      This   divorces   all    spirits   from 
Adam.     And  I  have  no  objection  to  it.      I  take  back 
nothing  I  said  in  the  debate  with  Mr.   Logan.     But,  it 
seems  to  me,  my  friend  is  completely  and  forever  undone 
over  the  passage  under  consideration.     "As  in  Adam 
all  die"  has  no  reference  to  man's  spiritual  nature,  for 
spirits,  in  no  sense,  die  in   Adam.     But  my  friend   con- 
tends that  only  spirits  are   made  alive— or  "  quickened 
into  spiritual  life  "—In  Christ !     Then  the  passage  should 


220  Oral   Discussion. 

read,  ''As  in  Adam  no7ie  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all 
be  made  alive " ! !  That  is,  all  w^ill  be  made  alive  in 
Christ  in  a  sense  in  which  none  die  in  Adam !  But  this 
is  not  the  \vorst  for  my  opponent,  bad  as  it  is !  He  has 
cut  himself  off  froin  this  passage  entirely.  He  has 
denied  that  -physical  death  came  by  Adam.  He  ridi- 
culed that  notion  in  his  last  speech.  He  contends  that 
physical  death  was  appointed  unto  all  men  before  Adam 
sinned,  and  without  any  reference  to  his  sin.  Then,  ac- 
cording to  his  teaching,  men  do  not  die  in  Adam  in  any 
sense!  And,  therefore,  we  must  read,  "  As  In  Adam  all 
die,  [in  no  sense  whatever]  even  so  in  Christ  [In  no 
sense  whatever]  shall  all  be  made  alive "  ! !  The  gentle- 
man must  keep  cool.  It  will  not  do  for  him  to  fret,  and 
accuse  me  of  misrepresenting  him.  I  am  not  to  blame 
for  the  trouble  in  which  he  has  involved  himself  and 
Universalism  over  this  passage.  He  did  it  all  himself. 
I  only  call  your  attention  to  it;  and  certainly  It  Is  my 
privilege  to  do  this.  Indeed  It  Is  iny  business  to  do  it. 
But  I  must  Insist  that  It  Is  high  time  for  him  to  abandon 
this  passage  entirely  and  forever.  I  need  not  say  that 
the  gentleman  has  denied  anything  like  a  future  general 
resurrection,  as  being  taught  by  this  passage,  for  that  is 
already  but  too  plain  to  all.  He  makes  the  resurrection 
of  this  passage  just  what  he  has  made  the  resurrection  of 
every  other  passage  that  teaches  a  resurrection  at  all — only 
a  quickening  of  man's  spiritual  nature  "  into  spiritual 
life,"  When,  therefore,  any  one's  spiritual  nature  is 
quickened  "  Into  spiritual  life,"  that  is  all  the  resurrec- 
tion there  is  for  him  I 

In  his  last,  the  gentleman  hardly  knows  just  what  his 
position  is,  as  to  "  the  spirits  in  prison."  He  thinks  I 
misunderstood  him.     I  understand  him  to  assume  that 


Universal  Salvation.  221 

there  are  spirits  in  prison  in  the  spirit-world,  and  that 
the  Gospel  is  pi'eached  to  them  there.  But  he  seems 
unwilling  to  say  this  now.  His  position  now  is,  that 
"  God's  mercy  extends  to  spirits  in  prison,  let  that  prison 
be  where  it  may ; "  and  this,  he  says,  "  is  what  the  pas- 
sage proves,"  that  he  quoted.  But  the  passage  proves 
no  such  thing.  It  says  nothing  about  God's  mercy 
extending  to  spirits  in  pi'ison  in  the  future  world.  The 
passage  speaks  of  "  spirits  in  prison,"  it  is  true.  And, 
therefore,  I  believe  there  ai^e  "  spirits  in  prison,"  awaiting 
the  Judgment  day — "  reserved  unto  the  day  of  Judgment 
to  be  punished" — as  Peter  taught  in  his  second  Epistle. 
But  Peter  did  not  say  the  f  reaching  was  done  i?i  prison. 
That  was  done  "in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark 
was  preparing."  But  he  thinks  the  passage  he  quoted 
from  Isaiah  teaches  that  "Jesus  was  sent  to  liberate  all 
captives,  to  open  all  prisons,  to  break  all  chains,"  etc. 
Where  was  Jesus  sent  to  do  all  this }  Has  my  friend 
found  any  scripture  that  tells  of  Jesus  being  sent  any- 
where, to  seek  and  to -save,  but  to  this  vjorld?  I  think 
not.  Jesus  was  sent  to  this  world  on  a  mission  of  salva- 
tion; and  he  sent  his  apostles  "into  all  the  world"  to 
"preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature."  I  know  not 
whence  my  learned  opponent  derives  his  authority  for 
preaching  the  Gospel  to  devils,  and  to  "the  spirits  in 
prison,"  who  all  their  lives  rejected  every  message  from 
heaven — who  "had  pleasure  in  unrighteousness"  rather 
than  in  virtue;  "whose  glory  is  in  their  shame;"  "whose 
end  is  destruction." 

"All  reconciled  to  God."  The  gentleman  again  calls 
up  the  passage  in  Colossians  i.  i6-3i.  Here,  he  tells 
us,  "several  purposes  of  God  are  made  known."  He 
enumerates  nine,  I  believe ;  and  shows  that  I  allow  that 


232  Oral  Dlsctission. 

there  is  "no  failure"  as  to  the  first  seven,  but  contend 
that  as  to  the  last  two  there  will  be  an  "  awful  failure." 
Well,  if  you  will  notice  what  he  calls  the  first  seven 
purposes  in  the  list,  you  will  discover,  that  for  their 
accomplishment  they  all  depended  alone  upon  God; 
while  the  reconciliation  of  man  depends  to  some  extent 
upon  men,  and  not  alone  upon  God.  If,  therefore,  the 
first  seven  are  accomplished — all  that  depend  alone  upon 
God — and  the  last — that  depends  somewhat  upon  men 
— is  not;  to  whom  shall  the  "failure" — if  failure  we 
call  it — be  attributed.''  Of  course  to  men,  who,  the 
great  apostle  to  the  Gentiles  teaches  us,  may  '•'•fail  of  the 
grace  of  God."  And  it  will  be  just  what  my  friend 
calls  it — "  an  awful  failure."  I  would,  therefore,  exhort 
all  to  "  Follow  peace  with  all  men,  and  holiness,  without 
which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord ;  looking  diligently  lest 
any  manya//  of  the  grace  of  God."     Heb.  xii.  14,  15. 

Romans  fifth,  again.  "  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedi- 
ence many  were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of 
one  shall  many  be  made  righteoais."  Now,  as  I  said 
before,  this  teaches  that  what  the  race  lost  by  Adam,  be 
it  much  or  little — be  it  nvhat  it  may — the  race  will  re- 
cover by  Jesus  Christ.  So  that  none  will  have  to  give 
account  in  the  great  day  for  Adam's  sin,  but  every  one 
will  receive  "according  to  his  [own]  works."  This, 
too,  is  what  Dr.  Clarke  and  Dr.  McKnight  taught,  as  I 
understand  them,  notwithstanding  the  gentleman  parades 
them  as  against  me,  on  this  passage.  But  why  does 
Mr.  Manford  quote  this  passage.''  He  should  let  this 
go  with  the  15th  of  Corinthians,  as  it  teaches  just  the 
same.  "  For  since  by  one  man's  [tliat  is  Adam's]  dis- 
obedience many  were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience 
of  one  [Christ]  shall  many  be  made  righteous."      But 


Universal  Salvation. 


233 


how  many  "were  made  sinners"  by  Adam's  disobedi- 
ence? My  friend  says  none.  They  were  all  made 
corrupt  and  dying  -physically.,  without  any  reference  to 
"one  man's  disobedience;"  and  spiritually,  men  sustain 
no  relation  to  Adam.  Therefore  none  are  made  sinners 
by  Adam,  in  any  sense,  according  to  what  Mr.  Manford 
has  taught  us.  Hence  we  shall  have  to  read  this  text — 
"  As  by  one  man's  disobedience  none  were  made  sinners, 
so  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  none  [the  same  none] 
be  inade  righteous  " ! 

Aly  opponent  is  very  exti'avagant  in  his  statements,  at 
times.  I  fear,  indeed,  that  his  extravagancy  of  statement 
will  be  damaging  to  his  reputation  for  fairness,  if  he  is 
not  more  careful  in  the  future.  He  says,  "  ninety-nine 
of  every  hundred  who  have  died  since  the  birth  of  Jesus 
are  lost,  if  he  is  right" — that  is,  if  I  am  right.  In  al- 
most the  next  breath,  he  says,  (after  reading  an  extract 
from  my  debate  with  Mr.  Logan)  "His  view,  I  am 
pleased  to  say,  does  not  involve  infant  depravity  and 
damnation."  And  just  how  often  he  has  said  that  "o^ze- 
third  of  our  race  die  in  infancy,"  I  cannot  say.  Now 
can  these  statements  be  made  to  tally  .^  Hardly,  I  think. 
But  he  proceeds  to  say,  "  Heaven  will  be  nearly  empty, 
and  hell  crowded;  Satan  will  get  nearly  all  mankind, 
and  the  Savior  of  the  world  only  one  here  and  there." 
This  is  a  song  Universalists  have  been  singing  all  over 
the  country,  for  several  years.  The  song  and  chorus  are 
all  one,  and  all  infidels  join  them  in  the  chorus.  But 
they  are  singing  "  to  buncombe."  How  is  it  tioiu  ?  The 
churches  "  are  nearly  empty,"  and  brothels,  and  all  other 
cess-pools  of  hell  brought  to  the  surface,  "are  crowded;" 
Satan  has  "nearly  all  mankind,  and  the  S.ivior  of  the 
world  only  one  here  and  there."     And   t!iis   is  the  case, 


324  Oral  Discussion.. 

too,  where  the  Gospel  is  preached  daily,  and,  therefore, 
where  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  be  so,  except 
that  many  choose  to  be  vicious  rather  than  virtuous — 
"  have  pleasure  in  unrighteousness."  I  cannot  see  how 
death  will  empty  all  the  hells  of  earth  into  heaven.  Let 
the  gentleman  sing  on. 

But  now,  friends,  I  have  given  attention  to  all  the 
gentleman  said  in  his  last  speech  that  I  felt  demanded 
my  attention.  This  concludes  the  discussion  of  the  first 
proposition.  You  have  heard  all  the  gentleman  has  to 
say ;  and  you  have  heard  patiently ;  and  in  hearing  what 
he  has  had  to  say,  you  have  heard  the  very  best  that  can 
be  said  for  the  cause  he  advocates.  If  he  has  failed  to, 
prove  his  proposition — and  I  certainly  think  he  has  most 
signally  failed — it  has  not  been  because  he  has  not 
brought  ability  and  zeal  enough  to  the  work;  for  he 
commands  as  much  of  both  as  any  man,  who  advocates 
his  cause,  east,  west,  north,  or  south.  He  has  failed 
because  his  proposition  affirms  what  no  man  can  prove. 
It  affirms  that  "all  who  leave  this  world  sinful  will 
finally  be  I'econciled  to  God,  and  saved."  But  about  the 
reconciliation  and  salvation  of  those  who  leave  this 
world  sinful  there  is  not  one  syllable  to  be  found  in  the 
whole  revelation  God  has  made  to  man.  Not  one !  If 
there  were  any  scrijoture  support  for  such  an  affirination 
mv  opponent  would  have  brought  it  out.  He  is  not  the 
man  that  would  foil  for  want  of  adducing  scripture,  if 
there  were  any  to  be  found. 

On  my  part,  I  have  kept  myself  in  the  negative.  I 
might  have  brought  forward  scores  of  passages  of  scrip- 
ture that  teach  adversely  to  the  gentleman's  proposition ; 
but  I  have  not  chosen  to  do  so.  I  have  given  him  all 
his  time  to  bring  forward  his  proof,  having  myself  intro- 


Universal  Salvation.  225 

duced  only  such  scriptures  as  I  was  almost  compelled  to 
introduce  to  explain  such  as  he  read,  and  to  answer  the 
questions  that  he  submitted  to  me.  And,  as  the  gentle- 
man made  no  resuitic  of  his  line  of  argument,  I  will 
not  even  call  up  the  scriptures  I  have  introduced,  as  I 
have  just  time  for  one  word  of  admonition,  specially 
designed  for  the  young  of  our  hearers.  Being  a  young 
man  myself,  I  feel  at  liberty  to  admonish  you,  dear 
friends,  to  count  nothing  on  the  chances  of  reformation 
in  the  future  world.  JVotv,  it  is  safe  to  turn  to  God,  if 
you  have  not,  and  learn  to  love  and  practice  virtue  and 
holiness.  You  will  be  the  happier  for  it,  in  this  life. 
All  who  know  you  will  be  influenced  for  good  by  it. 
You  will  never  regret  it  in  time  or  in  eternity.  We  are 
all,  I  verily  believe,  treading  constantly  upon  chords 
that  will  vibrate  eternally.  The  doctrine  of  Progression, 
advocated  by  Humboldt,  from  whom  the  gentleman  read, 
in  the  conclusion  of  his  speech,  7nay^  in  some  sense,  be 
true;  but  there  is  no  salvation  even  in  that  for  one  who 
is  going  downwa7'd.  It  is  only  safe  to  enter  our  eternal 
state  of  existence  going  in  the  right  direction — going 
upward,  and  God-ward,  Then  progression  may  do 
something  for  us.  But  when  we  enter  the  future  world, 
should  we  leave  the  Gospel,  the  church,  all  good  people, 
all  holy  influences  by  which  we  are  now  surrounded — 
which  he  who  dies  in  his  sins  will  do — then  what  will 
turn  us  God-ward .''  My  friend  has  told  us  that  the  Gos- 
pel will  follow  sinners  there.  With  all  possible  defer- 
ence to  him,  I  should  want  higher  authority,  even  were 
I  disposed  to  live  in  sin  while  I  live,  and  then  repent  in 
the  future.  I  should  want  to  be  certain,  positively  cer- 
tain, that  I  would  meet  with  no  disappointment.  For 
should   it  turn  out  with  me  as  with  the  "  Rich  Man," 


226  Oral  Disaisslon. 

the  mistake  would  be  fatal,  final.  It  would  be  hell 
enough  for  it  to  be  said  to  me,  by  the  father  of  the  faith- 
ful :  "  Between  us  and  you  there  is  a  great  gulf  fixed ; 
so  that  they  which  would  pass  from  hence  to  you  cannot; 
neither  can  they  pass  to  us,  that  would  come  from 
thence."     [  Time  expired. 


JUDGMENT  —  PUNISHMENT. 


SECOND    PROPOSITION. 

"yl/  the  coming  of  Christy  yet  future^  the  ivorld  will 
be  judged^  and  the  wicked  sentejiced  to  endless  punish- 
ment." 

Mr.  Sweeney  affirms;  Mr.  Manford  denies. 


[mr,  Sweeney's  first  speech.] 
Gentle?nen  Moderators,  Ladies  and  Gentleinen : 

I  answer  as  affirmant  to  the  proposition  just  read  by 
the  presiding  moderator,  and  am  before  you  to  enter 
upon  the  work  of  proving  it.  The  proposition,  as  you 
have  doubtless  observed,  is  not  a  single  logical  affirma- 
tive, but  involves  at  least  four  affirmations.  It  affirms, 
first.  That  the  coming  of  Christ  is  yet  future;  second. 
That  the  judgment  of  the  world  is  future;  third,  That  the 
wicked  will  be  punished  in  the  future ;  and,  fourth.  That 
that  punishment  will  be  endless.  All  these  topics  are 
most  intimately  connected,  and  may  very  properly  be  in- 
cluded, as  they  are,  in  one  proposition.  Without  further 
preliminary  remarks,  therefore,  I  proceed  to  the  work  of 
proof.  And,  first,  I  read  from  Matthew's  testimony  con- 
cerning the  Savior,  twenty-fifth  chapter,  beginning  at 
the  thirty -first  verse : 

"  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and 
(227) 


228  Oral  Discussion. 

all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  his  glory : 

"  And  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  nations :  and 
he  shall  separate  them  one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd 
divideth  his  sheep  from  the  goats: 

"  And  he  shall  set  the  sheep  on  his  right  hand,  but  the 
goats  on  the  left. 

"  Then  shall  the  King  say  unto  them  on  his  right 
hand,  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  king- 
dom prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world : 

"  For  I  was  a  hungered,  and  ye  gave  me  meat :  I  was 
thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink :  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye 
took  me  in : 

"Naked,  and  ye  clothed  me:  I  was  sick,  and  ye  vis- 
ited me:  I  was  in  prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me. 

"  Then  shall  the  righteous  answer  him,  saying,  Lord, 
when  saw  we  thee  a  hungered,  and  fed  thee }  or  thirsty, 
and  gave  thee  drink .'' 

"When  saw  we  thee  a  stranger,  and  took  thee  in.''  or 
naked,  and  clothed  thee.? 

"  Or  when  saw  we  thee  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  came 
unto  thee.'* 

"  And  the  King  shall  answer  and  say  unto  them, 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  inasmuch  as  ye  have  done  it  unto 
one  of  the  least  of  these  my  brethren,  ye  have  done  it 
unto  me. 

"  Then  shall  he  say  also  unto  them  on  the  left  hand, 
Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  pre- 
pared for  the  devil  and  his  angels: 

"  For  I  was  a  hungered,  and  ye  gave  me  no  meat :  I 
was  thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  no  drink : 

"  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye  took  me  not  in :  naked,  and 
ye  clothed  me  not:  sick,  and  in  prison,  and  ye  visited 
me  not. 

"  Then  shall  they  also  answer  him,  saying.  Lord,  when 
saw  we  thee  a  hungered,  or  athirst,  or  a  stranger,  or 
naked,  or  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  did  not  minister  unto 
thee  } 

"  Then  shall  he  answer  them,  saying.  Verily  I  say 
unto  you,  inasmuch  as  ye  did  it  not  to  one  of  the  least 
of  these,  ye  did  it  not  to  me. 


yudgment — Punishment.  229 

"And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punish- 
ment :  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal." 

This  passage  covers  all  the  points  in  the  proposition. 
It  teaches,  first,  That  "  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in 
his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him ; "  second, 
That  "  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory,  and 
before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  nations,  and  he  shall 
separate  them  one  from  another,"  etc.;  third,  That  the 
wicked  "shall  go  away"  into  "punishment;"  and, 
fourth.  That  it  will  be  "  everlasting  punishment."  It 
remains  now  for  me  to  show  that  all  this  hficture. 

I.  I  proceed,  therefore,  to  show,  in  the  first  place,  that 
the  coming  of  the  "  Son  of  man  in  his  glory,  and  all 
the  holy  angels  with  him,"  is  yet  future.  It  is 
very  necessaiy  that  we  should  have  the  point  I  am 
aiming  to  establish  very  definitely  fixed  in  our  minds. 
It  is  the  coming  of  "  the  Son  of  man  in  his  glpry^ 
,and  all  the  holy  angels  with  hifn.""  The  Savior 
said  once,  before  his  death,  "  There  be  some  stand- 
ing here,  which  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see 
the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  kingdojn."  Matt.  xvi.  28. 
This  is  past,  I  grant.  In  these  words  the  Savior 
doubtless  referred  to  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom 
in  the  world.  This  is  made  clear  by  the  manner  in 
which  Mark  and  Luke  record  it.  Mark  has  it  thus  ; 
"  There  be  some  of  them  that  stand  here,  which  shall 
not  taste  of  death,  till  they  have  seen  the  kingdom  of 
God  co7ne  with  power."  Mark  ix.  i.  And  Luke  has 
it  thus :  "  There  be  some  standing  here,  which  shall  not 
taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  kingdoTn  of  God"  Luke 
ix.  27.  Now,  it  will  be  granted,  that  the  kingdom  of 
God  was  established  in  the  lifetime  of  some  who  were 
present  witli  the  Savior  when  he  uttered   these  words. 


230  Oral  Dlscussioti. 

One  of  the  Evangelists  calls  the  establishing  of  this 
kingdom,  as  foretold  by  Jesus,  "the  Son  of  man  coming 
in  his  kingdom."  But  I  would  have  you  observe  that 
this  is  never  called  the  coming  of  "  the  Son  of  man  in  his 
glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him."  It  w^as  never 
intimated  that  any  one  who  was  present  with  the  Savior 
should  live  to  see  him  "  come  in  his  glory  with  his 
holy  a?igels."  The  coming  "in  his  kingdom"  was 
the  beginning  of  that  of  which  his  coming  "  in  his 
glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,"  shall  be  the 
end.  This  will  appear  more  fully,  however,  as  I  pro- 
ceed with  the  argument.  Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that 
I  now  have  before  me  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man 
"  in  his  glory,  with  all  the  holy  angels"  for  it  is  when 
he  so  comes  that  he  will  judge  the  world,  and  sentence 
the  wicked  to  everlasting  punishment.  To  show  that 
this  coming  is  future,  your  attention  will  now  be  invited 
to  several  passages  of  scripture. 

"When  Christ,  who  is  our  life,  shall  appear,  then 
shall  ye  also  appear  with  him  in  glory."  Colossians  ili.  4. 
The  apostle  speaks  in  this  passage  of  an  appearing  of 
Christ  "  in  gloiy,"  that  was  future  at  his  writing.  He 
could  not  have  referred  to  his  "  coming  in  his  kingdom," 
or  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  for  that 
was  past,  as  the  apostle  had  taught  in  the  first  chapter 
of  this  same  epistle.  See  verse  13,  "  Who  hath  de- 
livered us  from  the  power  of  darkness,  and  hath  trans- 
lated us  into  the  kingdoin  of  his  dear  Son."  This  shows 
that  the  kingdom  had  already  come,  and  Paul  and  those 
whom  he  addressed  were  in  it.  But  the  appearing  "  in 
glory,"  of  which  he  speaks,  was  in  the  future.  Observe 
these  words :  "  Then  [at  his  appearing]  shall  ye  also 
appear  with  him  in  glory."     Have  the   saints   already 


Judgment — Punishment.  231 

been  glorified  with  Christ?  If  so,  when?  But  let  us 
read  other  passages  on  this  point.  2  Thes.  iii.  i :  "  Now 
we  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  by  our  gathering  together  unto  hi/n." 
Phillip,  iii.  20,  2i :  "For  our  conversation  is  in  heaven; 
from  whence,  also,  we  look  for  the  Savior,  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ;  who  shall  change  our  vile  body,  that  it 
may  be  fashioned  like  unto  his  glorious  body,  according 
to  the  working  whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subdue  all 
things  unto  himself."  i  John,  iii.  2 :  "  Beloved,  now 
are  we  the  sons  of  God,  and  it  doth  not  yet  appear  what 
we  shall  be :  but  we  know  that,  tvhen  he  shall  appear., 
we  shall  be  like  him:  for  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is." 

These  scriptures  teach  that,  at  the  coming  of  Christ, 
the  saints  shall  be  "gathered  together"  unto  him;  that 
their  "  vile  body  shall  be  changed,  that  it  may  be  fash- 
ioned like  unto  his  glorious  body;"  that  they  "  shall  see 
him  as  he  is,"  and  "  shall  be  like  him."  Has  Christ  so 
come,  and  has  all  this  been  fulfilled  ?  If  so,  It  would  be 
Interesting  to  know  just  when.  But  what  we  have  seen 
implies  what  is  elsewhere  taught,  that  the  dead  shall  be 
raised  when  Christ  "  shall  come  in  his  glory  with  his 
mighty  angels."  "  For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend 
from  heaven  with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel, 
and  with  the  trump  of  God :  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall 
rise  first :  Then  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be 
caught  up  together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the 
Lord  in  the  air:  and  so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord. 
Wherefore  comfort  one  another  with  these  words."  i 
Thes.  Iv.  16,  17,  1 8.  And  we  learn,  also,  that  christians 
shall  realize  the  hope  of  the  gospel — which  certainly 
involves  the  resurrection  of  the  dead — when  Jesus  shall 
appear  in  his  gloiy.     "  For  the  grace  of  God  that  bring- 


233  Oral  Discussion. 

eth  salvation  hath  appeared  to  all  men,  teaching  us 
that,  denying  ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  we  should 
live  soberly,  righteously  and  godly,  in  this  present  world ; 
looking  for  that  blessed  hope^  and  the  glorious  appear- 
ijig  of  the  great  God  and  our  Savior  Jesus  Christ." 
Titus  ii.  II,  12,  13. 

Will  the  gentleman  say  the  time  is  past  when,  "  deny- 
ing ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  we  should  live  soberly, 
righteously,  and  godly,  in  this  present  world;  looking 
for  that  blessed  hope,  and  the  glorious  appearing  of  the 
gi'eat  God  and  our  Savior  Jesus  Christ"?  Let  us  read, 
also,  2  Thes.  i.  6-10: 

'  "  Seeing  it  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God  to  recom- 
pense tribulation  to  them  that  trouble  you ; 

"And  to  you,  who  are  troubled,  rest  with  us,  when 
the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his 
mighty  angels. 

"  In  flaming  fire  taking  vengeance  on  them  that  know 
not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ: 

"  Who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of 
his  power; 

"  When  he  shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  and 
to  be  admired  in  all  them  that  believe  (because  our  tes- 
timony among  you  was  believed)  in  that  day." 

In  this  passage  we  learn  that  Jesus  shall  take  "  ven- 
geance on  them  that  know  not  God,  and  obey  not 
the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  —  that  they 
"  shall  be  punished  with  eveilasting  destruction  from 
the  presence  of  God  and  the  glory  of  his  power" — 
^'"when  he  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  ivith  his  jnighty 
angels  " — "  when  he  shall  come  to  be  glorijicd  in  his 
saints.,  and  to  be  admired  by  all  tliat  believe  in  that 


Judgment — Punishment.  233 

day."  This  connects  the  coming  of  the  Lord  in  his 
glory  with  his  mighty  angels,  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints, 
with  the  judgment  and  punishment  of  the  ungodly  and 
disobedient.     Is  all  this  past.-*     I  think  not. 

I  wish  to  call  attention  now  to  ist  Cor.  xv.  22,  23: 
"  For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive.  But  every  man  in  his  own  order:  Christ 
the  first  fruits;  afterward  they  that  are  Christ's  at  his 
coming." 

This  passage  my  opponent  has  already  quoted  in  this 
discussion,  and  referred  to  the  future  for  its  fulfillment. 
Well,  in  this  passage,  the  coming  of  Christ  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  are  connected.  But  it  will 
doubtless  be  said,  that  there  is  nothing  said  here  about 
the  judgment  and  punishment  of  the  wicked.  But  I 
have  already  connected  the  judgment  and  punishment 
of  the  wicked  with  the  coming  of  Christ,  "  to  be  glori- 
fied in  his  saints;"  and  I  now  propose  to  show  that  this 
passage  in  the  15th  of  Corinthians,  that  the  gentleman 
himself  refers  to  the  future,  speaks  of  this  same  coming. 
At  the  35th  verse  we  read,  "  But  some  will  say.  How 
are  the  dead  raised  up?  and  with  what  body  do  they 
come?"  This  Is  the  resurrection  of  the  33d  verse,  that 
is  to  take  place  "  at  his  coming."  Now,  observe  that 
the  apostle.  In  his  answer  to  the  question — "  How  are 
the  dead  raised  up?"  says,  verses  43,  43 — "  It  is  sown 
in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in  incorruption.  It  is  sown  in 
dishonor,  it  is  raised  in  glory."  This,  then,  is  the  resun-ec- 
tion  to  '•'■glory."  Observe,  also,  that  it  is  a  resurrection 
of  the  "  body."  "  It  is  sown  a  natural  body,  it  is 
raised  a  spiritual  body."  The  resurrection,  then,  spoken 
of  in  this  chapter,  that  my  friend  has  admitted  is  future, 
is  to  take  place  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  "At  his 
20 


234  Oral  Discussion. 

coming,"  "  they  that  are  Christ's"  "shall  be  made  alive" 
" /«  glory"  Now,  let  us  read  again,  2  Thes.  i.  7-10: 
"  When  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with 
his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance  on 
them  that  know  not  God,  and  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting 
destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  the  glory 
of  his  power — when  he  shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his 
saints."  How  will  he  be  "  glorified  in  his  saints "  ? 
Why,  his  saints  shall  be  raised  from  the  dead  "  in  glory" 
"at  his  coming,"  as  we  have  just  learned  in  the  passage 
that  my  opponent  admits  refers  to  the  future.  Thus  we 
connect  the  resurrection,  spoken  of  in  the  15th  of  Corin- 
thians, with  the  coming  of  Christ  in  judgment — to  take 
"vengeance  on  them  that  know  not  God,  and  obey  not 
the  gospel  of  our  Loi"d  Jesus  Christ;  who  shall  be  pun- 
ished with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of 
the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his  power."  This  puts  the 
coming  of  Christ  to  judge  the  world,  and  the  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked,  in  ih.Q  future,  which  is  all  I  have 
aimed  to  do  by  this  ai'gument.  I  am  not  now  arguing 
the  question  as  to  the  endlessness  of  punishment.  That 
will  receive  proper  attention  in  due  time.  What  is 
meant  by  the  "everlasting  punishment"  of  the  wicked, 
will  be  much  more  easily  determined  when  we  shall 
have  definitely  determined  ivhen  "  these  shall  go  away 
into  everlasting  punishment." 

Having  connected  the  coming  of  Christ  to  judge  the 
world  with  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  realiza- 
tion of  the  "  blessed  hope  "  of  the  saints,  I  now  propose 
to  show  that,  at  his  coming,  this  earth  will  be  dissolved 
by  fire.     I  read  2  Peter,  HI.  3-12: 


Judgment — Punishment.  235 

*'  Knowing  this  first,  that  there  shall  come  in  the  last 
days  scofters,  walking  after  their  own  lusts, 

"And  saying,  Where  is  the  promise  of  his  coming? 
for  since  the  fathers  fell  asleep,  all  things  continue  as 
they  were  from  the  beginning  of  the  creation. 

"  For  this  they  willingly  are  ignorant  of,  that  by  the 
word  of  God  the  heavens  were  of  old,  and  the  earth 
standing  out  of  the  water  and  in  the  water; 

"  Whereby  the  world  that  then  was,  being  overflowed 
with  water,  perished : 

"  But  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  which  are  now,  by 
the  same  word  are  kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fire 
against  the  day  of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly 
men. 

"  But,  beloved,  be  not  ignorant  of  this  one  thing,  that 
one  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a  thousand  years,  and  a 
thousand  years  as  one  day. 

"The  Lord  is  not  slack  concerning  his  promise,  as 
some  men  count  slackness;  but  is  long-suffering  to  us- 
ward,  not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all 
should  come  to  repentance. 

"  But  the  day  of  the  Lord  will  come  as  a  thief  in  the 
night;  in  the  which  the  heavens  shall  pass  away  wnth  a 
great  noise,  and  the  elements  shall  melt  with  fervent 
heat,  the  earth  also  and  the  works  that  are  therein  shall 
be  burned  up. 

"  Seeing  then  that  all  these  things  shall  be  dissolved, 
what  manner  of  persons  ought  ye  to  be  in  all  holy  con- 
versation and  godliness, 

"Looking  for  and  hasting  unto  the  coming  of  the 
day  of  God,  wherein  the  heavens  being  on  fire  shall  be 
dissolved,  and  the  elements  shall  melt  with  fervent 
heat.?" 

Here  we  have  the  "coming  of  the  Lord"  connected 
with  "  the  day  of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly 
men ; "  and  we  learn  that,  in  that  day,  "  the  heavens 
shall  pass  away  with  a  great  noise,  and  the  elements 
shall   melt   with   fervent   heat,  the   earth,  also,  and   the 


236  Oral  Discussion. 

things  therein  shall  be  burned  up."  Is  all  this  past? 
If  so,  when  did  it  come  to  pass?  I  know  of  nothing 
answering  to  all  this  that  has  transpired  in  the  history 
of  our  world  since  these  words  were  written.  All  these 
things  remain  to  be  fulfilled  in  the  future  of  our  race 
and  world.  I  know  the  thought  is  wonderful  and  ter- 
rible. The  fiiith  of  a  rationalistic  people  reels  under  its 
tremendous  weight,  and  seeks  to  explain  it  away.  But 
the  Lord  has  spoken  it,  and  it  is  faithful  and  b'ue.  That 
terrible  day  will  come  as  a  thief  in  the  night.  The 
Lord  is  not  slack  in  the  fulfillment  of  his  promise,  as 
some  men  count  slackness.  He  wills  not  that  any 
should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repentance 
and  live,  and  therefore  the  day  so  terrible,  and  yet  so  full 
of  hope  to  the  christian,  has  not  been  brought  upon  the 
world.  But  when  that  day  shall  come,  all  debates  like 
this  will  close,  and  close  forever.  No  man  will  ever  again, 
you  may  be  assured,  undertake  the  work  of  proving 
that  the  coming  of.  the  Lord  to  judge  the  world  is  future. 
When  that  day  passes  all  will  know  it,  and  all  debate 
about  it  will  be  closed  out  forever.  "  Behold  he  cometh 
with  clouds,  and  every  eye  shall  see  him,  even  they  who 
pierced  him ;  and  all  kindreds  of  the  earth  shall  wail 
because  of  him."  Rev.  i.  7.  And  here,  by  the  way, 
my  opponent  may  test  the  sincerity  of  his  belief,  that 
"  all  kindreds  of  the  earth"  include  all  mankind.  [  Time 
expired. 

[mr.  manford's  first  reply.] 

Gentlefnen  Moderators^  Ladies  and  Gentlemen : 

Before  noticing  Mr.  Sweeney's  arguments  in  defense 
of  his  proposition,  I  will  offer  a  couple  of  objections  to 


Judgment — Ptmishment.  237 

his  notion  of  a  judgment  day  at  the  winding  up  of 
human  affairs. 

I.  It  is  clearly  of  heathen  origin.  No  one  pretends 
that  Moses  taught  it;  yet  it  was  believed  in  in  the  days  of 
Moses.  Zoroaster  taught  it;  Pagan  mythology  taught 
it;  but  Moses  knew  nothing  of  it;  the  Law  knew  noth- 
ing of  it.  Moses  records  the  first  revelation  God  made 
to  man,  and,  in  that  revelation,  the  true  day  of  judg- 
ment is  clearly  revealed.  The  words  of  the  Lord  were, 
"  In  the  day  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die," 
(Gen.  ii.  17) — not  in  some  day  millions  of  years  hence. 
In  my  humble  opinion,  it  js  as  true  now  as  it  was  six 
thousand  years  ago,  that  in  the  day  we  sin  we  are 
judged.  Sixty  centuries  have  not  made  that  truth  a 
falsehood.  True,  the  Bible  speaks  of  judgments  in  the 
future  as  well  as  present,  for  the  good  reason,  that  men 
would  live  and  act  in  ^e  future  as  well  as  in  the  present. 
Now,  and  hereafter,  sin  and  its  judgment  go  together. 

And  there  is  a  crisis  in  a  bad  man's  life  when  the 
judgments  of  heaven  fall  thicker,  and  faster,  and  heavier. 
He  has  "  been  treasuring  wrath  against  the  day  of 
wrath,"  and  down  comes  the  storm  u2Don  him.  The 
tippler,  the  gambler,  the  debauchee,  suffer  the  judgments 
of  heaven  all  their  days,  but  the  crisis  in  their  lives  comes, 
and  to  destruction  they  speedily  go.  The  same  of  cities, 
the  same  of  nations.  Vice  debases  them  all  the  time, 
but  the  hai"vest  comes,  and  they  are  hurled  to  ruin. 

The  Christian  Era,  in  the  Bible,  is  also  called  a  day 
-'  of  judgment.  Besides  these,  I  see  no  judgments  spoken 
/  of  in  the  Scriptures.  My  friend's  judgment  day  clearly 
belongs  to  heathenism ;  it  is  no  part  of  the  Gospel.  Rollin, 
in  his  Ancient  History,  mentions  a  curious  custom  of  the 
Egyptians.     When  a  man  died,  judges  passed  sentence 


238  Oral  Discussion. 

on  his  life  and  his  dead  body;  and  that  is  the  egg  that 
has  hatched  the  judgment  Mr,  Sweeney  talks  about.  I 
will  quote  from  Rollin: 

"  The  assembly  of  the  judges  met  on  the  other  side  of 
the  lake,  which  they  crossed  in  a  boat.  He  who  sat  at  the 
helm  was  Charon;  and  this  gave  the  hint  to  Orpheus, 
who  had  been  in  Egypt,  and  after  him  to  other  Greeks, 
to  invent  the  fiction  of  Charon's  boat.  As  soon  as  a 
man  was  dead,  he  was  brought  to  his  trial.  The  public 
accuser  was  heard.  If  he  proved  that  the  deceased  had 
led  a  bad  life,  his  memory  was  condemned,  and  he  was 
deprived  of  burial.  The  people  admired  the  power  of 
the  laws,  which  extended  even  beyond  the  grave;  and 
every  one,  struck  with  the  disgrace  inflicted  on  the  dead 
person,  was  afraid  to  reflect  dishonor  on  his  own  memory 
and  his  family.  But  if  the  deceased  person  was  not 
convicted  of  any  crime,  he  was  interred  in  an  honorable 
manner."     Page  55. 

This  custom  gave  Orpheus  and  "other  Greeks"  a 
"hint,"  not  only  to  locate  "Charon"  and  his  "boat"  in 
the  other  world,  but  to  locate  the  "trial,"  the  judgment, 
there  too.  They  spiritualized  the  whole  of  this  Egyptian 
custom.  The  lake,  the  boat,  old  Charon,  the  judges,  and 
the  awards,  they  located  beyond  the  grave.  The  favorites 
of  the  gods  were  put  in  the  Elysian  fields,  and  the  un- 
believers in  the  gods  were  locked  up  in  black  Tartarus. 
Virgil,  a  heathen  himself,  thus  writes  of  the  prison  of 
the  damned : 

"  At  hell's  dread  mouth  a  thousand  monsters  wait ; 
Grief  weeps,  and  Vengeance  bellows  at  the  gate ; 
Base  Want,  low  Fear,  and  Famine's  lawless  rage, 
And  pale  Disease,  and  slow  repining  Age  ; 
Fierce,  formidable  Fiends  the  portals  keep, 
With  Pain,  Toil,  Death,  and  Death's  half-brother,  Sleep. 


jfudgment — Punishment.  239 

There  Joys,  embittered  by  Remorse,  appear, 

Daughters  of  Guilt ;  here  storms  destructive  War, 

Mad  Discord  there  her  snaky  tresses  tore; 

Here,  stretched  on  iron  bed,  the  Furies  roar ; 

And  close  by  Lerna's  hissing  monster  stands 

Briarius  dreadful  with  a  hundred  hands  ; 

There  stern  Geriyon  raged  ;  and  all  around 

Fierce  Harpies  screamed,  and  direful  Goigons  frowned." 

This  Egyptian  custom,  spiritualized  by  the  poets, 
seems  to  have  been  the  origin  of  the  modern  judgment 
day,  and  the  modern  hell.  The  truth  is,  a  great  deal 
that  passes  in  our  day  for  Christianity  is  only  paganism 
reconstructed,  repainted,  and  renamed. 

II.  The  judgment  day  of  my  friend's  creed  is  entirely 
unnecessary.  Judgments,  or  courts  among  men,  are 
necessary  for  the  detection  and  suppression  of  crime. 
But  this  necessity  arises  from  our  ignorance  and  inability 
to  be  in  every  place  at  the  same  time.  Could  w^e,  at  all 
times  and  places,  and  without  any  process  of  thinking, 
detect  the  criminal  and  the  crime,  and  w^ere  the  authority 
necessary  to  suppress  the  crime  committed,  and  prevent 
the  injury  from  spreading,  at  all  times  present  when  the 
iniquity  was  done,  there  would  be  no  necessity  for  a 
judgment  to  be  held.  But  this  is  not  the  case  with 
mankind.  The  crime  is  committed  in  the  dark.  The 
criminal  is  often  unknown,  and  must  be  ferreted  out; 
and  his  guilt  established  by  the  testimony  of  witnesses. 
And  will  any  one  say  this  is  necessary  with  Him  who 
knows  his  works  from  the  beginning  to  the  end ;  whose 
eye  pierces  through  nature,  and  with  one  glance  com- 
prehends the  whole?  Is  he  under  the  necessity  of  in- 
stituting a  formal  process.'*  Must  he  make  inquiry,  who 
has  committed    a    crime,  or   how  much    guilt    attaches 


240  Oral  Discussion. 

itself  to  particular  individuals?  And  is  he,  who  is  every- 
where present,  unable  to  suppress  crime  without  this 
grand  assize?  Will  he  require  the  aid  of  witnesses? 
Clearly  this  great  judgment  day  is  utterly  useless.  It 
must  all  be  for  a  grand  display.  I  can  assign  no  other 
reason.  But  then  it  will  be  like  the  mountain  in  the 
fable :  "  Parturiunt  montes  nascitur  ridiculus  musculus." 
I  will  now  give  iny  friend's  proof  of  this  future 
judgnnent  day  due  attention.  It  seems  that,  in  his 
estimation,  the  judgment  was  to  take  place  when 
Jesus  was  to  come  in  power  and  glory.  It  also 
appears,  that  he  supposes  this  coming  is  Christ's 
Third  coming.  He  referred  to  Matt.  xvi.  and  other 
places,  where  Christ's  coming  in  his  kingdom  is  spoken 
of,  and  admitted  that  coming  has  taken  place.  That 
was  Christ's  Second  coming,  his  First  coming  being  in 
the  flesh,  when  he  lived  and  died  for  inan.  Now,  I 
will  show  you,  that  this  final  coming  in  judgment  he 
talks  about  was  his  coming  in  his  kingdom,  which  he 
ADMITS  HAS  TAKEN  PLACE.  Remember,  he  quoted 
Matt.  xvi.  28,  and  admitted  that  the  coming  spoken  of 
there  has  transpired.  I  will  read  the  verse  he  read,  and 
the  one  immediately  before,  and  you  will  see  at  once 
that  I  am  correct.  "  For  the  Son  of  inan  shall  come  in 
the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his  angels ;  and  then  he 
will  reward  every  man  accoi'ding  to  his  works.  Verily 
I  say  unto  you.  There  be  some  standing  here,  which 
shall  not  taste  of  death  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man 
coming  in  his  kingdom."  He  said  the  coming  spoken 
of  in  the  latter  part  of  this  passage  took  place  about 
eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  before  some  whom  Christ 
addressed  died.  But,  it  is  as  clear  as  daylight  that  only 
one  coming  is  spoken  of  in  the  whole  passage.    This  being 


y  udgincftt — -PuiiisJiment.  241 

so,  Christ's  coming  in  glory  and  in  judgment  took  place 
long  since.  The  gentleman  said,  "I  will  proceed  to 
show  that  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  with  his 
angels  is  yet  future,"  and  the  very  first  joassage  he  read, 
if  he  had  read  it  all^  proves,  beyond  the  possibility  of  a 
doubt,  that  coming  to  be  a  past  event.  Let  no  one  for- 
get, that  this  coming  which  he  admits  to  be  past,  was  a 
coming  in  glory ^  and  in  judgment.  I  might  close  my 
speech  here,  for  his  whole  speech  is  refuted,  and  refuted 
by  his  own  admission,  and  by  his  own  proof-text ;  but  I  ^ 
will  furnish  more  evidence,  that  this  coming  he  so  / 
strangely  puts  in  the  future,  has  taken  place. 
s_  Said  Jesus  to  the  seventy  when  he  sent  them  abroad, 
"  But  when  they  persecute  you  in  this  city,  flee  ye  to 
another;  for  verily  I  say  unto  you,  Ye  shall  not  have 
gone  over  the  cities  of  Israel  till  the  Son  of  man  be 
come."  Matt.  x.  23.  He  was  to  come  so  soon  they 
would  not  have  time  to  visit  all  of  Israel's  cities,  and 
yet  my  friend  thinks  he  has  not  come!  Again  said 
Christ,  "And  then  shall  appear  the  sign  of  the  Son  of 
man  in  heaven :  and  then  shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth 
mourn,  and  they  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in 
the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory.  *  * 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  this  generatiox  shall  not 

PASS,    TILL    ALL  THESE  THINGS  BE  FULFILLED."       Matt. 

xxlv.  30,  34.  Here  again  is  the  coming  \x\  judgment.,  in 
po-jDcr  and  glory.,  and  Jesus  distinctly  told  his  hearers 
that  all  these  things  should  take  place  in  that  generation. 
This  is  the  third  time  our  Savior's  words  refute  Elder 
Sweeney.  The  passage  he  read  from  2  Thes.  i.  refers 
doubtless  to  the  same  coming  these  other  jiassages  do, 
and  so  that  is  taken  out  of  his  hands. 

He  then  went  to  2  Peter  iii.,  and  I  will  go  there  too. 
21 


242  Oral   Discussion. 

The  coming  referred  to  there  was  to  occur  in  the  '■'•last 
days."  The  gentleman  dreams  they  are  the  last  days  of 
this  earth,  of  time.  Only  see  what  a  blunder  he  makes. 
"Little  children,  it  is  the  last  time;  and  as  ye  have  heard 
that  antichrist  shall  come,  even  now  there  are  many 
antichrists;  whereby  we  know  it  is  the  last  tifne." 
I  John  ii.  18.  The  last  time,  then,  was  in  John's  day, 
long  since.  "  God,  who  at  sundry  times,  and  in  divers 
mannei's,  spake  in  times  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the 
prophets,  hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by 
his  Son."  Heb.  i.  12.  According  to  Paul,  the  last  days 
were  in  his  days.  And  Peter  himself  tells  us  to  what 
last  days  he  refers.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost,  Peter, 
speaking  of  the  wonderful  manifestations  of  the  Spirit, 
said,  "  This  is  that  which  was  spoken  of  by  the  prophet 
Joel,  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days"  etc. 
Acts  i.  16,  17.  These  passages  decide  when  the  last 
days  were.  They  were  in  John's  lifetime,  in  Peter's 
lifetime,  and  my  friend  is  wrong  in  referring  them  to 
the  end  of  time.  The  coining  was  to  take  place  in  the 
last  days,  therefore  it  is  a  fast  event — another  evidence 
that  the  coming  in  judgment  belongs  to  the  past,  not  to 
the  future.  These  evidences  are  sufficient.  They  prove 
beyond  all  doubt,  that  the  coming  of  Christ  in  judgment 
is  not  in  the  future. 

In  every  kingdom  there  is  a  king,  a  law,  and  a  judg- 
ment. Christ's  kingdom,  set  up  in  the  generation  in 
which  he  lived  on  earth,  has,  of  course,  all  these  elements. 
Christ  himself  is  the  king,  the  lawgiver,  and  the  judge, 
in  his  kingdom.  His  reign,  his  judgment,  were  to  con- 
tinue from  the  beginning  to  the  ending  of  his  kingdom. 

My  friend  read  some  passages  that  connect  a  coming 
of  Christ  with  the  end  of  Christ's  reign,  when  he  shall 


Judgment — Punishment.  243 

deliver  up  the  kingdom  to  God  the  Father,  and  God  be 
all  in  all.  We  find  all  through  the  Bible,  that  when  a 
remarkable  event  of  divine  providence  was  to  take  place, 
it  is  said  that  the  Lord  would  come.  I  need  not  read  pas- 
sages to  prove  this,  for  every  Bible  reader  knows  it  to  be 
a  fact.  Hence,  when  the  kingdom  was  set  up,  Christ  is 
represented  as  coming;  when  the  kingdom  is  to  be 
returned  to  God,  it  is  said  Christ  will  come.  Both  com- 
ings are  called  glorious  comings.  The  coming  in  his 
kingdom  was  glorious,  and  the  coming  to  deliver  up  the 
kingdom  will  also  be  glorious. 

But  there  is  this  difference  between  the  two  comings. 
Judgment  is  connected  with  his  coming  in  his  kingdom, 
but  not  with  his  coming  at  the  end  of  his  reign.  The 
judgment  commenced  when  Christ  came  in  his  kingdom. 
Then  he  came  as  a  king,  lawgiver,  and  judge.  The 
judgment  day  then  commenced.  He  is  now  king,  law- 
giver, and  judge.  The  judgment  is  now  set.  But  when 
he  comes  at  the  end  of  his  reign,  he  will  not  come  as 
judge,  but  to  deliver  up  the  kingdom  to  God.  His 
reign,  his  judgeship,  and  his  kingdom,  will  then  end. 
The  judgment,  then,  commenced  when  he  came  in  his 
kingdom,  and  will  continue  till  the  end  of  his  reign, 
and  then  it  will  cease.  You  see,  that  the  judgment  will 
end  when  my  learned  friend  thinks  it  will  begin.  That 
is  a  grave  mistake;  but  brother  Sweeney  is  not  the  only 
one  that  has  made  that  blunder.  The  passages  in  Matt. 
XXV.,  2  Thes.  i.,  and  i  Peter  iii,,  are  figurative  representa- 
tions of  the  passing  away  of  the  old  dispensation,  and 
the  ushering  in  of  the  new  dispensation,  all  of  which 
took  place  in  the  generation  in  which  our  Lord  lived, 
before  some  whom  he  addressed  died.  And  this  view 
of   those  jDassages   is  sustained    by   some    of   the    most 


244  Oral  Dlscussiofi. 

learned  men  of  different  denominations.  I  expect  to 
show  before  I  am  through  with  this  debate,  that  this 
view  of  those  passages  corresponds  with  the  figurative 
language  of  the  Bible.  Prophecies  generally  are  given 
in  figurative  language,  as  all  know.     \Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  second  speech.] 

Without  stopping  now  to  pass  in  review  the  speecn  to 
which  you  have  just  listened — promising,  however,  to 
give  proper  attention  to  such  matters  in  it  as  I  deem  it 
necessary  for  me  to  notice,  in  due  time — I  shall  proceed 
with  the  affirmative  argument.  I  showed  in  my  first 
speech  that,  "  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his 
glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he 
sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory,  and  before  him  shall  be 
gathered  all  nations,"  and  he  shall  judge  them,  separate 
them,  and  sentence  the  wicked  to  eveidasting  punish- 
ment. Then  I  think  I  showed  that  this  coming  of  the 
Son  of  man  "In  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with 
him,"  is  yet  future.  But  as  it  is  of  the  utmost  import- 
ance that  this  matter  be  clearly  established  in  our  minds, 
I  shall  proceed  now  to  draw  another  line  of  argument. 

II.  I  shall  attempt  to  prove,  in  the  second  place,  by 
scriptures  bearing  directly  upon  the  subject,  that  the 
judgjncnt  of  the  world  is  yet  future.  Before  adducing 
the  scripture  arguments  upon  which  I  shall  relv,  how- 
ever, I  wish  to  establish  a  preliminary  position.  This 
I  do  for  the  purpose  of  saving  time  and  talk,  and  help- 
ing to  a  better  understanding  of  the  matter  in  hand. 
And  as  all  will  readily  agree  with  me  in  the  position  I 
am  about  to  assume,  but  my  opponent  and  some  of  his 


Judg7ne7it — Punishment.  245 

friends,  I  choose  to  submit  it  in  the  words  of  a  distin- 
guished UniversaHst  author.  Rev.  I.  D.  Williamson,  in 
his  work  entitled,  '-'•  Endless  Misery  Examined  and 
Refuted"  page  20,  says :  "  It  should  be  remembered 
that  the  Jewish  Government  was  a  Theocracy.  God 
was  to  that  people  nol  only  a  moral  Governor,  but  a 
civil  and  political  King.  He  gave  to  them  not  merely 
religious  principles,  but  civil  laws,  suited  to  their  wants 
and  circumstances.  Hence,  it  is  a  most  pernicious  mis- 
take to  confound  these  temporal  laws,  which  were  made 
for  an  ignorant  and  barbarous  people,  and  designed  to 
remain  but  for  a  season,  with  the  eternal  principles  of 
Gospel  grace  and  truth.  As  great  a  mistake  as  it  would 
be  to  proclaim  a  municipal  law  of  one  city  as  a  univer- 
sal law  of  nations."  The  position  here  laid  down  I 
accept  as  correct.  True,  Dr.  Williamson  was  not  treat- 
ing of  the  judgment  especially  when  he  penned  these 
lines;  but  that  matters  not.  The  position  is  a  correct 
one,  and  while  I  am  willing  that  Universalists  shall  have 
all  the  advantages  they  can  derive  from  it,  I  shall  avail 
myself  of  it  in  the  discussion  of  this  question.  "The 
Jewish  Government  was  a  Theocracy."  God  did  give  to 
the  Jewish  people  "  not  merely  religious  principles,"  but 
"civil  laws,  suited  to  their  wants  and  circumstances." 
And  if  it  be  "a  most  pernicious  mistake  to  confound 
these  temporal  laws,  which  were  made  for  an  ignorant 
and  barbarous  people,  and  designed  to  remain  but  for  a 
season,  with  the  eternal  principles  of  Gospel  grace  and 
truth,"  it  is  certainly  a  no  less  "pernicious  mistake"  to 
confound  the  temporal  judgments  of  that  dispensation 
with  the  judgment  of  the  world  by  Jesus  Christ.  God 
is  now  directly  a  civil  lawgiver  to  no  nation.  Hence, 
he  is  directly  the  civil  judge  of  no  nation,  as  he  was  to  the 


246  Oral  Discussion. 

Jewish  Theocracy.  He  has  ordained  civil  government 
in  the  hands  of  men,  but  has  made  Jesus  Christ  the 
giver  of  "rehgious  principles"  to  all  the  world,  and  its 
"moral  governor"  and  judge.  God's  judgments  there- 
fore, among  the  Jewish  people,  whose  civil  ruler  he 
was,  will  not,  I  trust,  be  brought  forward  to  disprove  a 
future  judgment  of  the  world,  by  Jesus  Christ,  the  giver 
of  religious  principles,  and  moral  governor  and  judge 
of  all.  If  my  friend  will  adhere  to  the  position  of  his 
brother  Williamson,  it  will  save  him  much  time  and 
ti'ouble.  But  if  he  will  not,  I  shall  have  to  hold  him  to  it. 
I  am  now  ready  to  call  attention  to  a  passage  of  scrip- 
ture in  John  v.  22 :  "For  the  Father  judgeth  no  man, 
but  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son."  I  cite 
this  passage  only  for  the  sake  of  what  it  expressly 
teaches.  It  teaches  that  Jesus  is  the  judge  of  all  men. 
As  to  the  time  of  his  judgment  this  passage  teaches 
nothing.  But  that  the  judgment  of  the  world  by  Jesus 
Christ  is  after  death,  and  hence  future,  I  will  now  un- 
dertake to  prove  by  direct  and  plain  scripture  testimony. 
I.  Acts  xxiv.  24,  25:  "And  after  certain  days,  when 
Felix  came  with  his  wife  Drusilla,  which  was  a  Jewess, 
he  sent  for  Paul,  and  heard  him  concerning  the  faith  in 
Christ.  And  as  he  reasoned  of  righteousness,  temper- 
ance, and  judgment  to  come,  Felix  trembled,  and  an- 
swered, Go  thy  way  for  this  time;  when  I  have  a  con- 
venient season,  I  will  call  for  thee."  Acts  xvii.  30,  31  : 
"And  the  times  of  this  ignorance  God  winked  at;  but 
now  commandeth  all  men  everywhere  to  repent:  be- 
cause he  hath  appointed  a  day,  in  the  which  he  will 
judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  by  that  man  whom 
he  hath  ordained :  whereof  he  hath  given  assurance 
unto  all  men,  in  that  he  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead." 


yudgmefit — Punishtnent.  247 

2  Tim.  iv,  6,  7,  8 :  "  For  I  am  now  ready  to  be  offered, 
and  the  time  of  my  departure  is  at  hand.  I  have  fouglit 
a  good  fight,  I  have  finished  my  course,  I  have  kept  the 
fiiith;  henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of 
righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge,  shall 
give  me  at  that  day;  and  not  to  me  only,  but  unto  all 
them  also  that  love  his  appearing."  All  this  is  the 
language  of  Paul,  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  He 
was  commissioned  to  preach  the  Gospel  some  eight  years 
after  the  Savior  had  said,  "  All  power  is  given  unto  me 
in  heaven  and  in  earth ; "  and  was  therefore  a  preacher 
in  the  Christian  dispensation.  Indeed,  the  apostle  claimed 
to  have  been  "  translated  into  the  kingdom  of  God's 
dear  Son."  As  a  preacher  of  the  Gospel,  then,  in  the 
Christian  dispensation,  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  Paul, 
reasoning  "concerning  the  faith  in  Christ,"  preached 
"judgment  to  come'''' — that  God  "  hath  appointed  a  day 
in  which  he  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness,"  by 
Jesus  Christ.  The  passage  from  his  letter  to  Timothy 
shows  that  Paul  did  not  understand  that  the  day  in 
which  the  world  Is  to  be  judged  In  righteousness  is  in 
this  life.  This  Is  the  last  epistle  of  his  life,  and  confes- 
sedly written  very  near  the  close  of  his  life,  as  his  lan- 
guage clearly  implies :  "  I  am  noiv  ready  to  be  offered, 
[to  die,  evidently,]  and  the  time  of  my  departure  is  at 
hand.  I  have  fought  a  good  fight,  I  have  Jittished  my 
course,  [my  earthly  career],  I  have  kept  the  faith ;  hence- 
forth, there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness, 
which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge,  shall  give  me  at 
that  day"  At  what  day.''  Had  he  not  taught,  long 
before,  that  God  "  hath  appointed  a  day  in  the  which  he 
will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness''^  ?  No'.v  that 
he  is  ready  to  die,  he  looks  forward  Into  the  future  for  a 


248  Oral  Discussion. 

"crown  of  righteousness"  which  "  the  Lord,  the  right- 
eous Judge"  W// give  him  '''•  at  that  day" — that  day,  of 
course,  in  which  he  will  judge  the  world  in  righteous- 
ness by  Jesus  Christ.  Paul,  then,  not  only  taught  judg- 
ment " /o  come" — not  only  taught  that  God  "hath  ap- 
pointed a  day  in  which  he  will  judge  the  world  in 
righteousness" — but  he  expected  that  judgment  to  come 
after  his  death,  when  "  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge," 
would  give  him  "  a  crown  of  righteousness." 

3.  The  dead  are  to  be  judged.  Therefore  the  judg- 
ment will  be  after  death,  and,  therefore,  future.  Acts 
X.  43 :  "  And  he  commanded  us  to  preach  unto  the 
people,  and  to  testify  that  it  is  he  which  was  ordained  of 
God  to  be  the  Judge  of  quick  and  dead."  This  teaches 
that  Jesus  is  "  to  be  the  Judge  of  the  quick  and  dead" 
It  is  sometimes  said  by  those  who  deny  that  the  judg- 
ment is  after  death,  that  "  the  dead,"  in  the  passage  be- 
fore us,  means  not  the  literally  dead,  but  the  dead  in 
trespasses  and  sins — the  morally  dead.  It  may  be  well 
for  me  to  attend  to  this  little  matter  as  I  go  along. 
What  dead  are  to  be  judged.''  Rev.  xx.  13,  13:  "And 
I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand  before  God ;  and 
the  books  were  opened :  and  another  book  was  opened, 
which  is  the  book  of  life :  and  the  dead  were  judged  out 
of  those  things  which  were  written  in  the  books,  accord- 
ing to  their  works.  And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which 
were  in  it;  and  death  and  hell  delivered  up  the  dead 
which  were  in  them :  and  they  were  judged  every  man 
according  to  their  works."  Matt.  xi.  31,  33:  "  Wo  unto 
thee,  Chorazin!  wo  unto  thee,  Bethsaida!  for  if  the 
mighty  works  which  were  done  in  you  had  been  done 
in  Tyre  and  Sidon,  they  would  have  repented  long  ago 
in  sackcloth  and  ashes.     But  I  say  unto  you,  it  shall  be 


Judgment — Punishmetit.  249 

more  tolerable  for  Tyre  and  Sidon  at  the  day  of  judg- 
ment, than  for  you."  Matt.  xii.  41,  43:  "The  men  of 
Nineveh  shall  i"ise  in  judgment  with  this  generation,  and 
shall  condemn  it:  because  they  repented  at  the  preach- 
ing of  Jonas;  and  behold,  a  greater  than  Jonas  is  here. 
The  queen  of  the  south  shall  rise  up  in  the  judgment 
with  this  generation,  and  shall  condemn  it:  for  she  came 
from  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  to  hear  the  wisdom 
of  Solomon;  and  behold,  a  greater  than  Solomon  is 
here."  These  scriptures  tell  us  plainly  enough  luhat  dead 
are  to  be  judged — the  dead  that  are  in  the  "  sea,"  in  the 
grave,  in  "  hell,"  \Jiades^  the  spirit  world] — all  are  to 
come  forth  and  be  judged.  The  men  of  "  Tyre  and 
Sidon  "  shall  be  present  "  at  the  day  of  judgment,"  with 
the  men  of  the  generation  to  whom  Jesus  spoke.  Then 
"the  ipen  of  Nineveh  shall  rise;"  also  "the  queen  of 
the  south  shall  rise  up  in  the  judgment,"  with  the  gen- 
eration to  whom  Jesus  spoke.  This  can  never  be  ful- 
filled before  death.  This  argument  puts  the  judgment 
after  death,  and,  therefore,  future. 

3.  It  is  expressly  taught  by  the  apostle  Paul  that  the 
judgment  is  after  death.  Heb.  ix.  37 :  "  And  as  it  is 
appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the  judg- 
ment." If  Paul  did  not  mean  by  this  language  to  teach 
that  the  judgmeat  comes  after  death,  he  was  certainly 
very  unhappy  in  his  selection  of  words.  Furthermore,  if 
he  did  not  mean  to  teach  that  the  judgment  is  after 
death,  then,  if  he  had  meant  to  so  teach,  what  kind  of 
language  could  he  have  used  .'*  In  other  words,  if  Paul's 
language  under  consideration  does  not  teach  that  the 
judgment  comes  after  death,  then  can  language  do  it? 
Can  a  better  selection  of  words  be  made  to  teach  that 
the  judgment  is  after  death,  than  that  employed  by  the 


250  Oral  Discussion. 

ajDostle  in  this  passage  ?  I  think  not.  I  profess  to  have 
a  moderately  fair  command  of  the  English  language.  I 
can  make  myself  understood  generally  by  people  who 
give  me  their  attention.  But  I  cannot  beat  this  passage. 
I  believe  we  shall  all  be  judged  after  death,  but  I  know 
of  no  way  of  expressing  that  belief  more  unequivocally 
and  unmistakably  than  Paul  expressed  it  in  the  passage 
before  us.  If  my  learned  opponent  can  so  tinker  this 
passage  and  the  others  I  have  cited  as  to  take  the  doc- 
trine of  a  future  judgment  out  of  them,  then  he  can, 
with  as  much  ease  and  by  the  same  rule,  tinker  that  doc- 
trine out  of  anything  I  ever  said,  or  ever  shall  say. 

Having  shown,  by  two  lines  of  argument  that  I  feel 
quite  certain  cannot  be  broken,  that  the  coming  of  Christ 
to  judge  the  world  is  yet  future,  I  am  now  ready  to  take 
another  step. 

III.  I  propose  to  show,  in  the  third  place,  that  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  to  take  place,  as  we  are  all 
agreed,  at  the  coming  of  Christ  in  judgment,  is  to  be 
after  death,  and,  therefore,  future.  We  read  in  3  Peter, 
ii.  4-9 :  "  For  if  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned, 
but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  and  deli\'ered  them  into 
chains  of  darkness,. to  be  reserved  unto  judgment;  and 
spared  not  the  old  world,  but  saved  Noah  the  eighth 
person,  a  preacher  of  righteousness,  bringing  in  the 
flood  upon  the  world  of  the  ungodly;  and  turning  the 
cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  into  ashes,  condemned 
them  with  an  overthrow,  making  them  an  ensample  unto 
those  that  after  should  live  ungodly;  and  delivered  just 
Lot,  vexed  with  the  filthy  conversation  of  the  wicked : 
(for  that  righteous  man  dwelling  among  them,  in  seeing 
and  hearing,  vexed  his  righteous  soul  from  day  to  day 
with  their  unlawful  deeds;)  the  Lord  knoweth  how  to 


Judgment — Punishment.  251 

deliver  the  godly  out  of  temptations,  and  to  resen^e  the 
unjust  unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished."  Here 
we  learn  that  "God  saved  Noah,"  but  brought  in  "the 
flood  upon  the  world  of  die  ungodly;"  "delivered  just 
Lot,"  but  "  condemned "  the  Sodomites  to  "  an  over- 
throw." From  which  considerations  the  apostle  con- 
cludes: "The  Lord  knoweth  how  to  deliver  the  godly 
out  of  temptation,  and  to  reserve  the  unjust  unto  the 
day  of  judgment  to  be  punished^  "  The  angels  that 
sinned"  are  "to  be  reserved  unto  judgment."  Also  the 
wicked  antediluvians  and  Sodomites  are  '•'•  reserved  \x\\\.o 
the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished."  Let  us  read, 
also,  on  this  point,  Rom.  ii.  3,  4,  5  :  "  And  thinkest  thou 
this,  O  man,  that  judgest  them  which  do  such  things,  and 
doest  the  same,  that  thou  shalt  escape  the  judgment  of 
God.?  Or  despisest  thou  the  riches  of  his  goodness,  and 
forbearance,  and  long-suffering;  not  knowing  that  the 
goodness  of  God  leadeth  thee  to  repentance.''  But  after 
thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up  unto 
thyself  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath,  and  revelation 
of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God."  This  passage 
teaches  the  same.  Men  nxdcy '•'•  treasure  up"  to  them- 
selves "  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath  and  revelation 
of  the  ri^h.te,ovi?,  judgment  of  God." 

We  will  now  give  attention  to  some  of  the  words  of 
the  Savior,  bearing  directly  upon  this  point.  Matt.  x. 
28 :  "  And  fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are 
not  able  to  kill  the  soul:  but  rather  fear  him  which  is 
able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  hell."  Luke  xii. 
4,  5 :  "And  I  say  unto  you,  my  friends,  be  not  afraid  of 
them  that  kill  the  body,  and  after  that,  have  no  more 
that  they  can  do.  But  I  will  forewarn  you  whom  ye 
shall  fear:  fear  him,  which  after  he  hath  killed,  hath 


253  Oral  Discussion. 

power  to  cast  Into  hell;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  fear  him." 
Here  is  an  exhortation  from  the  Great  Teacher  to  his 
disciples.  He  tells  them  whom  not  to  fear.  "  Fear  not 
them  which  kill  the  body" — "Be  not  afraid  of  them  that 
kill  the  body,  and  after  that  have  no  more  that  they  can 
do."  This  means  men.  Men  can  "'  kill  the  body,"  but 
"  after  that  have  no  more  that  they  can  do."  He  then 
tells  them  whom  to  fear.  "  Fear  him  who,  after  he  hath 
killed  [the  body],  hath  power  to  cast  into  hell" — \Gehe7i- 
na — not  hadcs.^  "  Fear  him  who  is  able  to  destroy  both 
soul  and  body  in  hell." 

These  passages  I  have  quoted  to  show  that  the  pun- 
ishment connected  with  the  judgment  of  the  world  is 
after  death,  and  hence  future.  I  now  call  attention  to 
a  few  passages  tliat  teach  expressly  that  the  condemna- 
tion and  punishment  of  the  wicked  come  after  the  resur- 
rection. Daniel  xii.  2 :  "  And  many  of  them  that  sleep 
in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting 
life,  and  some  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt." 
John  v.  28,  29 :  "  Marvel  not  at  this :  for  the  hour  is 
coming,  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear 
his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth;  they  that  have  done 
good,  unto  the  resun'ection  of  life;  and  they  that  have 
done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation."  Rev, 
XX.  13,  14:  "And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were 
in  it;  and  death  and  hell  delivered  up  the  dead  which 
were  in  them :  and  they  were  judged  every  man  accord- 
ing to  their  works.  And  death  and  hell  were  cast  into 
the  lake  of  fire.  This  is  the  second  death."  These 
passages  clearly  show  that  the  resurrection  of  the 
wicked  will  be  to  "judgment,"  "condemnation," 
"  shame  " — punishment.  Now  let  us  pause  one  moment 
and  see  what   we  have  before  us.     Mr.   Manford  and 


Judgment — Punishment.  253 

I  agree  that  the  scriptures  teach  a  coming  of  Christ  in 
judgment  to  punish  the  wicked ;  I  affirm  that  this  com- 
ing, and  judgment,  and  punishment,  are  yet  future;  and 
that  the  punishment  will  be  endless,  all  which  he  denies. 
I  have  shown,  in  the  first  place,  that  when  Christ  comes 
to  judge  the  world  and  punish  the  wicked,  he  will  "  come 
in  his  glory,  aad  all  the  holy  angels  with  him ; "  and  this 
coming  "  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him," 
I  have  shown  is  intimately  and  immediately  connected 
with  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  the  glory  of  the 
saints,  and,  therefore,  future.  Then,  secondly,  I  have 
shown,  by  another  line  of  argument,  that  the  "judg- 
ment" is  after  death,  and  hence  future.  And,  thirdly, 
I  have  shown  that  the  wicked  dead  are  "reserved"  unto 
punishment;  and  that  they  will  be  raised  from  the  dead 
to  judgment,  condemnation,  and  punishment.  And 
having  established  thus  much,  I  am  ready  now,  after 
turning  for  a  few  moments  to  notice  the  gentleman's 
attacks  upon  my  lines,  to  proceed  with  my  proof  as  to 
the  endlessness  of  punishment. 

But  my  time  for  the  present  has  expired.     [  Time  ex- 
pired. 


[mr.  manford's  second  reply.] 

I  readily  admit,  that  the  special  judgments  of  the 
Law  of  Moses  were  peculiar  to  the  Jews — confined  to 
the  Jews.  But  I  fail  to  see  that  that  fixct  helps  my 
friend's  cause  an  iota.  It  is  true,  that  judgment  is  now 
committed  to  the  Son.  And  the  Son  tells  us  how  he 
judges:  "The  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  shall 
judge  you."  "AVe  are  judged  by  the  Gospel.     The  Jews 


254  Oral  Discussion. 

were  judged  by  the  Law,  and  we  are  judged  by  the 
Gospel.  The  Law  judged  men  in  the  earth.  The  Gos- 
pel judges  men  in  the  earth.  It  is  admitted  by  the 
learned  of  all  denominations,  that  the  judgments  of  the 
Law  were  all  in  the  earth.  Dr.  Jahn,  Dr.  Campbell,  Dr. 
Paley,  Bishop  Warburton,  H.  W.  Beecher,  and  hosts  of 
others,  assert  this.  What  reason  have  we  to  locate  the 
judgment  under  the  Gospel  out  of  the  earth.?  God 
judged  in  the  earth  by  the  Law,  and  he  judges  in  the 
earth  by  the  Gospel.  I  pi-oved  this  last  point  in  my 
other  speech,  which  I  trust  my  friend  will  find  time  to 
consider. 

I  will  now  notice  his  additional  evidence  of  a  day  of 
judgment  at  the  end  of  time.  He  read  Acts  xxiv.,  where 
it  is  said  Felix  trembled  because  Paul  talked  to  him 
about  a  judgment  to  come.  About  one  year  after^ 
Felix  was  recalled  to  Rome  for  his  extortion,  loose  and 
violent  conduct.  His  brother  Pallas  barely  saved  his 
life.  That  judgment  was  "  to  come"  when  the  apostle 
had  that  conference  with  the  Governor,  and  it  did  come 
■  in  due  time.  I  rather  think  Felix  would  not  have 
"trembled"  much  if  Paul  had  told  him  he  would  not 
be  judged  for  several  thousand  ye^rs  forhis  bad  conduct. 
But  the  judgment  Paul  spoke  of  was  at  hand^  hence 
that  wicked  man  trembled. 

He  next  read  Acts  xvii.,  where  Paul  spoke  of  the  day 
in  which  God  would  judge  the  world  by  Jesus  Christ. 
In  my  last  speech  I  showed  when  that  judgment  day 
commenced.  It  commenced  wheii  Christ  came  in  his 
kingdom ;  and  Jesus  said,  that  should  take  place  before 
some  whom  he  addressed  would  die,  in  the  generation 
in  which  he  lived.  That  matter  is  so  plain  I  need  not 
spend  any  more  time  on  it.     His  quotation  from  2  Tim. 


Judgment — Punishment.  255 

vi.,  says  nothing'  about  judgment,  and  is,  therefore,  irrele- 
vant to  the  subject  before  us. 

My  friend  then  read  Acts  x.  42,  in  which  the  apostle 
said,  tliat  Christ  is  the  Judge  of  the  quick  and  the  dead. 
Let  us  learn  from  Paul,  not  from  Mr.  Sweeney,  what 
he  meant  by  quick  and  dead.  "And  you  hath  he  quick- 
ened who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins ;  even  when 
we  were  dead  in  sin  hath  he  quickened  us."  Eph.  ii.  r,  5. 
By  quick  and  dead^  then,  Paul  meant  believers  and  un- 
believers, saints  and  sinners.  We  have  seen,  that  Christ 
was  appointed  to  judge  them,  and  that  judgment,  we 
have  seen,  commenced  long  ago.  And  this  is  made  as 
clear  as  daylight  by  parallel  passages.  "  Who  shall  give 
account  to  him  that  is  ready  to  judge  the  qitick  and  the 
dead"  i  Peter  iv.  5.  Dr.  Macknight  says,  that  "quick 
and  dead  here  mean  Jeivs  and  Gentiles."  My  worthy 
friend  does  not  understand  St.  Paul,  or  St.  Peter  either. 
Mark,  also,  that  the  apostle  said,  that  in  his  day  Jesus 
was  READY  to  judge  men.  But  my  friend  thinks  he 
has  not  yet  commenced!  Got  ready,  in  his  estimation, 
several  thousand  years  too  soon!  How  exactly  these 
words  of  the  apostle  Paul  correspond  with  those  of  an- 
other apostle.  "  Be  patient,  therefore,  brethren,  unto  the 
coming  of  the  Lord.  For  the  coming  of  the  Lord  draw- 
eth  NIGH.  Behold  the  Judge  standeth  before  the 
door."  James  v.  7,  8,  9.  When  James  wrote  these 
words,  the  judgment  was  NEAR — the  judgment  of 
saints  and  sinners,  quick  and  dead.  But  my  friend  con-  \ 
tends  it  was  NOT  near,  but  thousands  of  years  off.  ' 
Another  passage :  "  I  charge  thee,  therefore,  before  God, 
and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  judge  the  qtiick  1 
and  dead  at  his  appearing  and  his  kingdom."  2  Tim,  / 
iv.  I.     This  was  to  take  place  when  Christ  would  appear 


256  Oral  Discussion. 

to  set  up  his  kingdom.  Now,  you  know  the  gentleman 
admitted,  in  his  first  speech  to-day,  that  that  appearing 
and  kingdom  occurred  long  since,  and  he  read  Matt.  xvi. 
28  to  prove  it.  I  will  read  it,  as  it  is  an  important  pas- 
sage— the  key  to  the  New  Testament  doctrine  of  judg- 
ment: "Verily,  I  say  unto  you,  there  be  some  standing 
here  who  shall  not  taste  of  death  till  they  see  the  Son  of 
man  coming  in  his  kingdom."  This  is  the  same  appear- 
ing and  the  same  kingdom  spoken  of  in  2  Tim.  iv.  just 
read ;  and  Jesus  declared  it  would  all  take  place  before 
some  he  addressed  would  die.  These  passages  all  relate 
to  the  same  judgment — the  judgment  of  Christ  which 
commenced  eighteen  hundred  years  ago. 

The  gentleman  then  went  to  Rev.  xx.,  where  the 
judgment  of  the  dead  is  spoken  of.  Does  not  "  dead," 
in  that  passage,  mean  the  same  as  in  the  other  passages  I 
have  read.''  And  is  not  the  judgment  the  same.''  The 
book  of  Revelation  proves  it  to  be  the  same  judgment.  In 
the  twenty-second  chapter  that  judgment  is  thus  spoken 
of:  "And  the  Lord  God  of  the  holy  prophets  sent  his 
angel  to  shov/  unto  his  servants  the  things  which  must 
SHORTLY  be  done.  Behold  I  come  QUICKLY. 
Seal  not  the  sayings  of  the  book,  for  the  time  is  AT 
HAND.  And  behold  I  come  QUICKLY;  and  my  re- 
ward is  with  me,  to  give  to  every  man  according  to  his 
work."  This  is  the  judgment  of  the  dead^  by  Jesus  Christ, 
the  judgment  of  the  quick  and  dead ;  and  here  we  are  told 
by  Jesus  himself  that  it  was  AT  HAND  when  the  book 
of  Revelation  was  given.  All  those  passages  about 
Christ's  coming,  his  coming  in  his  kingdom,  his  coming 
in  judgment,  relate  to  the  setting  up  of  the  Gospel  king- 
dom, and  the  judgment  connected  therewith.  There 
cannot  be  a  reasonable  doubt  of  this. 


y  udgment — PunisJuncnt.  257 

My  friend  then  read  Matt,  xi.,  the  meaning  of  which 
is,  that  the  calamities  about  to  fall  on  Bethsaida  and 
Chorazin  would  be  more  severe  than  those  which  form- 
erly befell  Tyre  and  Sidon.  The  passage  in  the  next 
chapter  has  a  similar  meaning.  This  view  of  those  pas- 
sages is  sustained  by  learned  men  of  other  denomina-  / 
tions. 

The  gentleman  went  to  Heb,  ix.  37.  Let  us  look  at  its 
context.  The  second  verse  following  reads  thus :  "  For 
the  law  having  a  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,  and 
not  the  veiy  image  of  the  things,  can  never  with  those 
sacrifices  which  they  offered  year  by  year  continually, 
make  the  comers  thereunto  perfect."  According  to  the 
grammatical  construction  of  this  passage,  the  pronoun 
they  refers  to  the  noun  "  men,"  in  the  verse  under  con- 
sideration, for  its  antecedent.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
about  that.  What  did  they^  the  men^  do?  Answer. 
"They  offered — sacrifices  —  year  by  year,  continually." 
That  is,  the  men  appointed  to  die  offered  saciufices. 
Now,  all  men  are  not  appointed  to  offer  sacrifices.  But 
a  particular  class  of  the  Hebrews  were  appointed  to 
offer  sacrifices.  The  Jewish  high  priests  were  appointed 
for  that  very  purpose.  It  was  to  them,  then,  that  the 
apostle  refers,  and  not  to  mankind  generally. 

What  is  meant  by  the  high  priest  being  appointed  to 
die  ?  Observe  the  context  again :  "  For  where  the  tes- 
tament is,  there  must  of  necessity  be  the  death  of  the 
testator.  For  a  testament  is  of  force  after  men  are 
dead ;  otherwise  it  is  of  no  strength  at  all  while  the  tes- 
tator liveth."  Verses  16,  17.  The  Jewish  covenant  was 
the  first  testament,  and  Moses  was  its  testator.  But  that 
testament  was  in  force  before  Moses  died  temporally. 
What  kind  of  a  death,  then,  is  meant.''  Read  on: 
22 


258  Oral  Discussion. 

"  Whereupon  neither  the  first  testament  was  dedicated 
without  blood.  For  when  Moses  —  its  testator  —  had 
spoken  every  precept  to  all  the  people  according  to  the 
law,  he  took  the  blood  of  calves  and  goats,  with  water 
and  scarlet  wool,  hyssop,  and  sprinkled  the  book  and 
the  people,  saying.  This  is  the  blood  of  the  testament 
which  God  hath  enjoined  upon  you."  Killing  those 
animals,  then,  shedding  their  blood,  by  a  figure  of 
speech,  is  called  the  death  of  Moses — -the  testator  of  the 
first  testament.  The  high  priests  were  appointed  to 
offer  sacrifices  as  Moses  did,  hence  it  is  said  they  were 
appointed  to  die,  as  Moses  the  testator  of  the  first  testa- 
ment died. 

There  is  allusion  here  to  the  annual  atonement  of 
the  Jews.  On  that  great  occasion,  the  priest,  who  was 
the  most  conspicuous  personage,  appeared  before  the 
assembled  congregation — that  appearing  typified  Christ's 
first  coming.  The  priest  then  offered  sacrifice  for  the 
sins  of  the  Jewish  nation  —  that  typified  the  death  of 
Christ  for  the  world.  The  priest  then  disappeared,  and 
entered  into  the  "  Holiest  of  all" — that  typified  Christ's 
entering  into  Paradise.  In  due  time  the  priest  reappeared 
to  the  people — that  typified  Christ's  resurrection,  which 
was  his  "  second  appearing."  The  priest,  at  his  second 
appearing  before  the  people,  passed  Jicdgment  on  them, 
which  was  that  their  sins  were  forgiven — that  typified  the 
Judgment  passed  on  all  who  trust  in  the  risen  Savior. 
They  behold  him  the  second  time — the  risen,  the  glorified 
Savior,  without  sin  unto  salvation.  His  first  appearing, 
was  when  he  came  in  the  flesh;  his  second  appearing, 
when  he  showed  himself  to  the  world  in  his  spiritual 
and  glorified  form;  and  all  who  confide  in  the  risen 
Redeemer,  as  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  life,  are  blessed 


Judgment — Punishment.  259 

with  life  and  salvation.  To  them  he  "  appears  the 
second  time  without  sin  unto  salvation."  This,  I  am 
well  satisfied,  is  the  true  meaning  of  the  passage. 

The  gentleman  is  inconsistent  in  asserting  that  Paul, 
in  this  passage,  means  the  physical  death  of  man,  for  he 
teaches  that  death  is  not  of  divine  appointment.  His 
position  is,  that  Adam  was  made  i/mnortal;  that  God 
did  not  intend  he  should  die;  did  not  intend  that  any  of 
his  posterity  should  die.  But  Adam  sinned,  and  that 
made  him  mortal ;  made  all  mankind  mortal :  brought 
death  on  Adam ;  brought  death  on  his  race.  According 
to  this,  death  is  the  penalty  of  sin — not  of  divine  ap- 
pointment, but  contrary  to  the  divine  will.  God,  rather, 
appointed  that  Adam  and  his  race  should  not  die.  The 
gentleman's  whole  theory  of  salvation  is  built  on  this 
supposition.  If  death  was  actually  of  divine  appoint- 
ment, his  whole  theory  falls  to  the  ground. 

By  the  way,  this  notion  that  Adam  would  not  have 
died  if  he  had  not  sinned,  sets  one  to  thinking.  Of 
course,  then,  if,  before  he  sinned,  he  had  sunk  to  the 
bottom  of  one  of  the  rivers  near  his  garden,  and  had 
stuck  in  the  mud,  he  might  have  remained  there  to  the 
present  time  without  drowning !  Or  if  a  huge  rock  had 
fallen  on  him  when  taking  an  evening  walk  at  the  out- 
skirts of  the  garden,  and  smashed  him  as  flat  as  a  pancake, 
he  would  not  have  died !  Or  if  a  tiger  had  torn  him  to 
pieces,  eaten  him,  and  digested  him,  he  would  not  have 
died !  If  either,  or  all  of  these  disasters,  had  happened 
to  father  Adam  before  .he  sinned,  he  would  not  have 
died,  if  death  was  the  result  of  sin.  I  hope  my  friend 
will  enlighten  us  right  here. 

He  next  proceeded  to  show  that  the  wicked  were  to 
be   punished  when   Christ  would   come.     That  is  not 


26o  Oral  Discussion. 

doubted.  He  then  assumed,  that  the  punishment  is 
after  death,  and  by  that  he  means,  not  immediately  after 
death,  but  after  tlie  judgmejit  at  the  end  of  time,  for 
then  he  thinks  Christ  will  come,  and  then  the  punishment 
begin.  Remember,  he  locates  the  coming,  the  judgment, 
the  punishment,  not  in  this  world,  but  in  eternity;  not 
now,  but  at  the  end  of  time.  But  he  thinks  there  is  a  hell 
this  side  of  the  judgment^  and  a  pretty  hot  one,  too. 
The  wicked,  who  died  six  thousand  years  ago,  have  been 
in  it  six  thousand  years;  and  if  the  judgment  should  be 
delayed  six  thousand  years  more,  they  will  be  in  hell  six 
thousand  years  longer,  making,  in  all,  twelve  thousand 
years.  And  be  there  all  that  time  too  without  being 
judged  I  It  strikes  me  rather  forcibly  that  is  a  hard  case. 
As  I  have  remarked,  in  my  friend's  estimation,  this  hell 
is  a  very  hot  place.  The  hell  in  which  was  the  "  Rich 
Man"  of  the  parable,  he  thinks,  is  the  hell  into  which 
all  the  wicked  have  been  stowed  away  from  the  begin- 
ning, and,  if  that  is  in  the  future  world,  it  is  anything 
but  a  comfortable  place  in  which  to  spend  ten  or  twenty 
thousand  years.  The  Rich  Man  was  "  tormented  in 
these  flames,"  and  he  was  so  hot  that  he  begged  for  "  a 
drop  of  water  to  cool "  his  tongue.  To  torment  men 
thus  thousands  of  yeai'S  without  judging  them,  would 
not  be  as  fair  as  it  would  be  to  hang  criminals  first  and 
then  judge  them.  These  are  only  some  of  the  beauties 
of  the  endless  punishment  theory.  I  expect  to  present 
more  of  them  ere  long. 

He  then  read  2  Peter  ii.  4-9,  to  prove  that  men 
will  be  punished  when  Christ  comes  at  the  end  of 
time.  But  he  strangely  overlooked  the  important  fact, 
that  there  is  not  a  word  said  in  the  passage  about 
Christ's   coming;   not  a   word  about   the   resurrection; 


judgment — Punishment.  261 

not  a  word  about  the  end  of  time;  not  a  word  about 
the  future  state.  He  assumed  \i  all  refers  to  scenes  be- 
yond the  resurrection  morn;  and,  on  that  baseless  assump- 
tion., he  builds  his  future  endless  hell !  Some  imgodly 
persons  were  reserved  unto  the  day — or  a  day,  according 
to  the  Greek — of  judgment  to  be  punished.  But  was 
that  judgment  to  be  defended  thousands  of  years,  and 
thev  in  "  these  flames "  all  the  time  without  being 
judged.-*  So  asserts  my  friend.  But  Peter  did  not 
think  the  judgment  was  so  far  off.  Speaking  of  those 
same  ungodly  persons,  he  said  they  were  bringing  "  upon 
themselves  swift  destruction,"  "whose  judgment  now 
of  a  long  time  lingereth  not."  My  brother  thinks 
their  judgment  has  lingered  about  two  thousand  years, 
and  may  linger  two  thousand  longer.  But  the  apostle 
said,  most  two  thousand  years  ago,  that  the  judgment 
LINGERETH  NOT;  that  a  SWIFT  JUDGMENT  was  coming 
vipon  them.  This  very  chapter,  then,  that  my  friend  read, 
affords  additional  evidence,  that  the  judgment  was  at 
hand  when  the  apostles  were  preaching  and  writing. 
The  antedeluvians  were  reserved  till  the  ark  was  built; 
the  Sodomites  v\^ere  reserved  till  Lot  was  safe;  the  un- 
godly of  which  Peter  spoke  were  reserved  to  a  judgment, 
whicli,  in  Peter's  day,  was  to  come  upon  them  swiftly ; 
it  was  not  to  linger.  -^ 

He  then  read  about  God  being  able  to  destroy  %oxi\  and 
body  in  hell,  Gehenna.  No  doubt,  God  was  able  to  de- 
stroy men  and  women  in  Gehenna.,  or  anywliere  else. 
But  does  that  prove  he  v/ould  do  so.^  Besides,  if  persons 
should  be  literally  destroyed  they  would  not  suffer  end- 
less punishment,  and  his  proposition  is  false. 

It  seems,  that  my  friend's  theology  has  several  hells. 
One  between  death  and  the  resurrection.     He  thinks  the 


263  Oral  Discussion. 

Rich  Man,  and  all  the  rest  of  the  wicked,  are  in  that 
hell.  It  has  been  crowded  for  thousands  of  years,  and 
still  there  are  ample  accommodations,  such  as  they  are. 
That  hell  and  its  fires  will  be  kept  up  till  the  resurrection, 
and  then  it  will  be  evacuated,  and  its  inhabitants,  after 
being  judged,  will  be  stowed  away  in  another  hell.  And 
he  quotes  Rev.  xx.  to  prove  such  abominations.  Before 
this  discussion  closes  I  expect  to  present  still  more  evi- 
dence that  the  "  lake  of  fire,"  in  that  chapter,  does  not 
relate  to  the  immortal  world.  I  have  already  proved, 
that  the  judgment  of  that  book  long  since  took  place. 
He  read  two  other  passages,  to  which  I  intend  to  give  due 
consideration.  As  my  time  is  about  out,  I  will  kindly 
tell  my  friend,  that  he  should  not  assume  that  all  those 
passages  he  reads  refer  to  the  future  world.  He  had 
better  read  a  less  number,  and  try  to  p7'ove  they  sustain 
his  proposition.     [  Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  third  speech.] 

I  shall  devote  this  speech  to  the  gentleman's  two  replies, 
that  as  yet  remain  unnoticed.  Let  us  turn  first  and  ex- 
amine Matt.  xvi.  37,  38:  "For  the  Son  of  man  shall 
come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his  angels;  and 
then  he  shall  reward  eveiy  man  according  to  his  work?. 
Verily  I  say  imto  you,  there  be  some  standing  here, 
which  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man 
coming  in  his  kingdom."  The  coming  of  the  Son  of 
man,  spoken  of  in  the  fii'st  of  these  verses,  is  evidently 
his  coming  in  judgment;  and  if  it  can  be  shown  to  be 
past,  then  I  am  defeated,  the  judgment  is  past,  and 
"every  man"  has  already  been  rewarded  "according  to 


Judgment — Punishment.  263 

his  works."     To  prove  that  this  coming  is  past,  my  op- 
ponent assumes  that  it  is  the  same  as  the  "  coming  in  his 
kingdom,"  mentioned  in  the  succeeding  verse,  which  was 
to  take  place  before  some  then  standing  by  should  "  taste 
of  death."     He  says,  "  It  is  as  clear  as  daylight  that  only 
one  coming  is  spoken  of  in  the  whole  passage."     Not  to 
my  mind.     On  the   contrary,  I    am    quite   certain  that 
there  are  two  events  spoken  of  in  the  whole  passage; 
the  one  to  be  the  end  of  what  the  other  was  to  be  the 
beginning.     If  the  Savior  meant,  in  the  twenty-eighth  . 
verse,  to  repeat  what  he  had  said  in  the  twenty-seventh, 
for  the  sake  of  teaching  the  proximity  of  the  event,  why 
did  he    not   use  the    same    language    descriptive  of   it.^" 
Why  did   he  so  change  his  phraseology?     In  the  first 
he   says,  "the   Son   of  man   shall   come   [how?]    in  the 
glory  of  his  Father^  with  his  angels ;  and   then   shall 
he  reward  every  man  according  to  his  works."     In  the 
second  place  he  speaks  of  an  event  entii'ely  different,  one 
that  should  transpire  before  some  who  were  standing  by 
should  taste  of  death.     And   how  does  he   describe  it? 
"The   Son  of  man   coming  [how?      "In  the  glory  of 
his  Father,  with  his  angels,  to  reward  every  man  accord- 
ing to  his  works"?     No.     How.,  then,  will  some  live  to 
see  him  coming?]  in  his  kingdom"     Some  who   heard 
him  were  not  to  taste  of  death  till   they  should   see   him 
entering  upon   his  reign,  at  the   end  of  which  reign  he 
would  "come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his  angels, 
to  reward  every  man   according  to   his  works."     I  illus- 
trate the  whole  passage  in  this  way:  I  say  to  this  people. 
Next   Sunday  I   shall  preach   in  Chicago;  and   then   to 
give  some  assurance  of  the  fact,  I  add,  Verily  I  say  unto 
you.  To-morrow  morning  you  shall  see  me  get  on  the  car 
at  your  depot.     When  you  see  the  beginning  you  may 


264  Oral  Discussion. 

the  more  confidently  look  for  the  end.  Under  what  cir- 
cumstances did  Jesus  speak  of  coming  to  this  world  in 
the  glory  of  the  great  God,  and  commanding  all  the 
holy  angels,  to  judge  all  men,  and  pass  upon  them  a 
sentence  that  should  fix  their  everlasting  destinies?  Let 
us  consider  this  matter  one  moment.  He  was  born  in 
the  lowest  depths  of  obscurity,  and  in  the  most  abject 
poverty.  His  earliest  wails  were  heard  by  none,  perhaps, 
but  his  mother,  Joseph,  and  the  beasts  of  the  stall.  He 
was  brought  up  in  obscurity.  He  never  went  to  school 
a  day  in  his  life.  His  few  friends  were,  like  himself, 
poor  and  powerless.  He  was,  therefore,  so  far  as  any 
man  could  see,  destitute  of  every  element  of  power. 
The  world  frowned  upon  him,  and  scoffed  at  his  claims. 
His  divinity  was  not  yet  known,  as  that  remained  to  be 
"  demonstrated  by  the  resurrection  from  the  dead." 
Standing  thus,  poor,  friendless,  powerless,  so  far  as  men 
could  see,  amid  the  scoffs,  scowls,  scorn,  sneers  and  jeers 
of  all  who  had  place  and  power,  he  says:  "  The  Son  of 
man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his 
an^-els,  and  then  shall  he  I'cxvard  every  77ian  according 
to  his  works."  What  an  astounding  claim!  Who  was 
ready  to  admit  it.?  What  was  there  to  be  seen  that 
would  indicate  its  truthfulness.'*  Then,  very  properly, 
he  proceeds  to  let  them  know  that  even  some  of  them 
should  live  to  see  some  evidence  of  the  final  fulfillment 
of  the  astounding  announcement  he  had  made :  "  Verily 
I  say  unto  you,  there  be  some  standing  here,  which  shall 
not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming 
in  his  kingdom."  But  he  did  not  say  any  of  them 
should  live  till  he  should  "  come  in  the  glory  of  his 
Father,  with  his  angels,  to  reward  every  man  according 
to  his  works."     He  did   not  teach  them  that  they  were 


Judgment — Punishment.  265 

to  expect  their  reward  in  this  life.  On  the  contrary,  he 
had  ah'eady  said,  "  Thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the 
resurrection  of  the  just."  See  Luke  xiv.  14.  Hence  the 
dying  Paul  said,  "  There  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of 
righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge,  shall 
give  me  at  that  day" — the  resurrection.  "  Coming  in 
his  kingdom,"  here,  does  not  mean  a  Hteral  and  personal 
coming,  and  may  not  be,  and  is  not,  called  the  "  second 
coming  of  Christ."  Mark  and  Luke  both  call  it  the 
coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  neither  of  them  calling 
it,  in  any  sense,  the  coming  of  Christ. 

Then  the  gentleman  refers  us  to  Matt.  x.  23:  "But 
when  they  persecute  you  in  this  city,  flee  ye  into  another: 
for  verily  1  say  unto  you,  ye  shall  not  have  gone  over 
the  cities  of  Israel  till  the  Son  of  man  be  come,"  Let  it 
be  observed,  however,  that  the  Savior  did  not  tell  his 
disciples  that  they  should  not  "have  gone  over  the 
cities  of  Israel  till  the  Son  of  man  be  come  in  his  glory., 
attdall  the  holy  angels  ivith  hifn,  to  reward  every  man 
according  to  his  -works." 

Next  the  gentleman  garbled  a  passage  in  Matt.  xxiv. 
To  Matthew  xxiv.  I  shall  go  with  him:  "Immediately 
after  the  tribulation  of  those  days,  shall  the  sun 
be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  lio-ht, 
and  the  stars  shall  foil  from  heaven,  and  the  powers 
of  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken:  and  then  shall 
appear  the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  in  heaven :  and  then 
shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth  mourn,  and  they  shall  see 
the  Son  of  man  coming  in  the  qlouds  of  heaven  with 
power  and  great  glory.  And  he  shall  send  his  angels 
with  a  great  sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  they  shall  gather 
together  his  elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  one  end  of 
heaven  to  the  other.     Now  learn  a  parable  of  the  fig- 


266  Oral   Discussion. 

tree;  when  his  branch  is  yet  tender,  and  putteth  forth 
leaves,  ye  know  that  summer  is  nigh :  so  Hkewise  ye, 
when  ye  shall  see  all  these  things,  know  that  it  is  near, 
even  at  the  doors.  Verily  I  say  vuito  you,  this  genera- 
tion shall  not  pass,  till  all  these  things  be  fulfilled." 

I.  What  means  the  "tribulation  of  those  days".^ 
Well,  we  will  agree,  perhaps,  that  it  means  the  tribula- 
tion to  be  brought  upon  the  Jewish  people.  It  began 
with  the  destruction  of  their  city  and  temple,  and  their 
dispersion;  but  has  it  ended  yet.''  I  answer,  «o.  Luke 
xxi.  23-24:  "For  these  be  the  days  of  vengeance,  that 
all  things  which  are  written  may  be  fulfilled.  But  wo 
unto  them  that  are  with  child,  and  to  them  that  give 
suck  in  those  days!  for  there  shall  be  great  distress  in 
the  land,  and  wrath  upon  this  people.  And  they  shall 
fall  by  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and  shall  be  led  away 
captive  into  all  nations :  and  Jerusalem  shall  be  trodden 
down  of  the  Gentiles,  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  be 
fulfilled."  "  These  be  the  days  of  vengeance  " — that  is, 
"  the  tribulation  of  those  days  " — "  they  shall  fall  by  the 
edge  of  the  sword,  and  shall  be  led  away  captive  into 
all  nations;  and  Jerusalem  shall  be  trodden  under  foot 
of  the  Gentiles,  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  he  ful- 
jilledr  Are  "the  times  of  the  Gentiles  fulfilled"  yet.? 
I  think  not.  Is  not  Jerusalem  still  "  trodden  under  foot 
of  the  Gentiles".''  I  think  it  is.  Then  is  "the  tribula- 
tion of  those  days"  past.?  Of  course  not.  Tribulation 
is  still  upon  that  people,  and  their  city  is  still  "  trodden 
under  foot  of  the  Gontiles;"  but  the  sign  of  the  com- 
ing" of  the  Son  of  man  is  to  appear  "  immediately 
after  the  tribulation  of  those  days ; "  therefore,  the  sign 
tliat  is  to  precede  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  is  yet 
future. 


yudgment — Punishment.  267 

2.  "This  generation  shall  not  pass,  till  all  these 
things  be  fulfilled."  My  friend  assumes  that  genea^  here 
rendered  "  generation,"  is  used  in  the  sense  of  "  a  period 
of  thirty  years,"  which  is  one  of  its  meanings.  But 
such  is  not  its  primary  meaning.  Primarily  it  means 
race.  Such,  doubtless,  is  its  meaning  here.  "  This 
race" — the  Jewish  people — "shall  not  pass" — shall  not 
become  extinct,  as  a  people — "  till  all  these  things  be 
fulfilled."  To  this  agree  former  prophecies  concerning 
the  matter.  Let  us  read  Jeremiah  xxx.  ii :  "Though  I 
make  a  full  end  of  all  nations  whither  I  have  scattered 
thee,  yet  will  I  not  make  siftdl  end  of  thee."  God  has 
made  a  "  full  end  "  of  all  ancient  peoples  but  the  Jews, 
and  he  has  preserved  them  in  their  dispersion,  and  does 
presen-e  them,  distinct  from  all  other  peoples.  Even  in 
our  composite  nationality  the  Jew  comes  here  and  re- 
mains here  distinctly  a  Jew — "  a  proverb,"  and  "  an  as- 
tonishment," and  a  "hissing,"  and  a  "by-word."  This 
fulfills  what  the  Savior  said — "  This  generation  " — this 
race — this  people — "shall  not  pass" — shall  not  become 
extinct  as  a  people — "till  all  these  things  be  fulfilled." 
"All  these  things  "are  to  be  fulfilled  upon  the  Jews; 
for  the  Lord  said  by  Moses,  almost  fifteen  hundred  years 
before,  speaking  of  these  very  tribulations — "  And  they 
shall  be  upon  thee  for  a  sign  and  for  a  wonder,  and  upon 
thy  seed  forever^     Deut.  xxviii.  46. 

The  gentleman  tries  to  break  the  force  of  the  pas- 
sage in  2  Peter  iii,,  by  showing  that  it  was  to  be  fulfilled 
"  in  the  last  days,"  and  that  John  said,  "  it  is  the  last 
time."  But  "  the  last  days,"  and  "  the  last  time,"  do  not 
mean  always  specifically  the  same  thing  in  New  Testa- 
ment usage,  any  more  than  in  common  usage.  What 
is  meant  by  either  one  of  those  phrases  must  be  determ- 


268  Oral  Discussion. 

ined  by  its  connection.  "  The  last  days"  may  mean  the 
last  days  of  the  Jewish  dispensation,  or  the  last  days  of 
the  Christian  dispensation,  or  tlie  Cliristian  dispensation 
itself.  So  of  "  the  last  time."  The  gentleman,  how- 
ever, assumes  that  these  phrases  always  indicate  the  close 
of  the  Jewish  dispensation ;  and  a  mere  assumption  it  is. 
Now,  admitting,  as  the  gentleman  assumes,  that  "  last 
days"  and  "last  time"  mean  the  same,  I  am  ready  to 
defeat  him  in  his  position  as  to  their  import,  by  Peter's 
own  use  of  the  phrase  "  in  the  last  time."  Turn  to  his 
first  epistle,  i.  3,  4,  5  :  "  Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which,  according  to  his  abund- 
ant mercy,  hatli  begotten  us  again  unto  a  lively  hope  by 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead,  to  an 
inheritance  incorruptible,  and  undefiled,  and  that  fadeth 
not  away,  reserved  in  heaven  for  you,  who  are  kept  by 
the  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  salvation,  ready  to 
be  revealed  in  the  last  time.'^  Does  "  the  last  time" 
here  mean  the  last  days  of  the  Jewish  dispensation.'' 
Did  Peter  and  his  brethren  realize  their  "hope"  to 
which  they  were  "  begotten  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ,"  in  the  last  days  of  the  Jewish  dispensation.'' 
Did  they  then  receive  the  inheritance  "  incorruptible^ 
zindejiled,  and  that  fadeth  not  away"?  Was  all  this 
"reserved  in  heaven"  for  such  as  were  kept  by  the 
power  of  God  through  faith  unto  salvation,  to  be  re- 
vealed in  the  last  days  of  the  Jewish  dispensation  .^  ! 
Will  my  friend  give  up  the  incorruptible  inheritance, 
the  undefiled  and  unfading  inheritance,  the  "  hope  "  in- 
spired by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead, 
for  the  sake  of  getting  by  the  judgment.^  The  fiact  is, 
however,  that  one  must  give  up  the  whole  Gospel — its 
hope,  the  everlasting  life,  the  incorruptibility  it  promises, 


J  udgment — Punishtuent.  269 

and  everything  else — must  have  all  to  have  been  accom- 
plished and  realized  about  the  time  Jerusalem  was  de- 
stroyed— or  he  must  give  up  Universalism.  My  friend 
seems  determined  to  hold  on  to  Universalisn-}  and  escape 
the  judgment  and  hell,  if  he  loses  every  promise  of  the 
resurrection  and  heaven ! 

The  gentleman  tells  us  that,  "  when  the  kingdom  was 
set  up,  Christ  is  represented  as  coming;"  and  that, 
"  when  the  kingdom  is  to  be  returned  to  God,  it  is  said 
Christ  will  come;"  and  he  further  tells  us  that  both 
these  "  comings  are  called  glorious,"  the  only  difference 
between  them  being  that  "judgment  is  connected  with 
his  coming  in  his  kingdom,  but  not  with  his  coming  at 
the  end  of  his  reign."  But  I  deny  squarely  that  his 
coming  in  his  kingdom  is  anywhere  called  his  "glorious 
appearing,"  or  his  coming  "in  glory."  I  deny,  also, 
that  "judgment  is  connected  with  his  coming  in  his 
kingdom,"  in  the  Bible,  in  a  single  instance.  It  may  be 
so  in  my  opponent's  mind,  but  not  in  the  word  of  God. 
Let  the  gentleman  show  what  he  has  asserted  on  this 
point  to  be  true,  if  he  can.  But,  of  course,  he  cannot. 
I  have  shown  that  judgment  is  connected  with  his  com- 
ing "  in  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,"  and 
that  his  coming  "  in  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with 
him,"  is  connected  with  the  resurrection  of  the  dead^ 
and  the  glory  of  his  saints.  His  coming  in'his  kingdom, 
or  entering  upon  his  I'eign,  is  never  called  his  "glorious 
appearing,"  or  his  coming  "  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy 
angels  with  him ; "  neither  is  there  any  resurrection  of 
the  dead  connected  with  it — neither  judgment,  nor  pun- 
ishment of  the  wicked,  nor  glory  of  the  saints. 

If,  as  Mr.  Manford  assumes,  and  propounds  to  us  so 
oracularly,   "the  judgment  commenced"   when   Christ 


270  Oral  Discussion. 

entered  upon  his  reig^n — "when  his  kingdom  was  set 
up" — is  it  not  singuhir  that  the  apostles,  who  were  in 
his  kingdom,  never  speak  of  hving  in  the  judgment  day, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  always  refer  to  it  as  future,  even 
when  dying,  as  in  the  case  of  Paul? 

True,  as  the  gentleman  told  us,  the  Savior  taught  that 
men  will  be  judged  by  his  word,  but  that  judgment  is, 
by  tlie  Savior  himself,  put  in  the  future :  "  He  that  re- 
jecteth  me,  and  receiveth  not  my  words,  hath  one  that 
judgeth  him :  the  word  that  I  have  spoken  the  same 
shall  judge  him  at  the  last  day"  True,  Christ  will 
judge  men  "by  the  Gospel,"  as  the  gentleman  told  us; 
but  is  that  a  present  judgment,  as  my  friend  teaches,  or 
is  it  to  be  in  the  future?  Paul  shall  answer:  "For  as 
many  as  have  sinned  without  law  shall  also  perish  with- 
out law,  and  as  many  as  have  sinned  in  the  law  shall  be 
judged  by  the  law,  *  *  *  *  {ji  the  day  when  God 
shall  judge  the  seci'ets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ  according 
to  my  Gospel."  Rom.  ii.  12-16.  This  puts  "  the  day" 
when  men  shall  be  judged  by  Jesus  Christ,  in  the  future. 
But  did  not  Paul  live  and  teach  in  the  Gospel  day  ? 
Was  he  not  in  the  kingdom  ?  He  said  he  was.  And 
so  \vere  all  the  apostles ;  and  yet  they  all  speak  of  the 
judgment  as  future — notwithstanding,  that,  according 
to  Mr.  Manford's  position,  they  were  all  living  in  the 
day  of  judgment!  And  how  did  it  happen  that  they 
lived  and  died  witliout  making  the  discovery?  !  Per- 
haps Mr.  Manford  can  tell  us.  I  desire  his  attention  to 
this  jDoint.  He  says,  when  the  apostles  in  the  Acts  and 
in  their  Epistles  refer  to  "the  day  of  judgment"  as 
future,  they  refer  to  the  coming  kingdom  of  Christ, 
whereas  the  kingdom  had  already  come  and  they  were 
in  it.     This  fact  completely  upsets  his  position  as  to  the 


y  udgment — Punishmejtt.  27 1 

day  of  judgment.  He  will  have  to  fall  back  upon  the 
old  ground,  that  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  the 
day  of  judgment. 

The  gentleman  tells  us  that,  when  "  Christ's  kingdom 
was  established,  his  judgment  began,"  and  that  he 
"judges  in  that  kingdom."  This  being  true,  he,  of 
course,  only  judges  citizens  of  the  kingdom — saints! 
and  yet  he  says  the  "quick  and  the  dead"  of  which 
Christ  is  ordained  to  be  the  judge,  are  "  saints  and  sin- 
ners"— that  is,  citizens  of  his  kingdom  and  aliens! 

I  notice  that  my  opponent  is,  after  all,  much  like  all 
other  Universalists  in  his  exegesis  of  scripture.  All  that 
does  not  suit  him  \%  figurative  I  It  is  hard  to  catch  him 
who  so  treats  the  word  of  God.  Any  one  can  maintain 
almost  any  position  if  allowed  that  liberty. 

The  judgment  to  come  that  Paul  reasoned  of  before 
Felix  was,  that  about  "  one  year  after  "  Felix  was  to  be 
"  recalled  to  Rome  for  his  extortion " !  That  caps  the 
climax!  Paul  was  speaking,  by  request,  "concerning 
the  faith  in  Christ,"  and  he  made  the  astounding  an- 
nouncement, fraught  with  such  thrilling  interest  to  man- 
kind in  all  ages  to  come,  that  Felix  was  going  to  lose 
his  office!! 

When  Paul  said  at  Athens,  "God  has  appointed  a  day 
in  which  he  'will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness,"  he 
referred,  the  gentleman  tells  us,  to  the  time  when  "  Christ 
would  come  in  his  kingdom."  But  Christ  had  already 
come  in  his  kingdom,  and  Paul  was  in  it.  Still  Paul 
spoke  of  the  day  of  judgment  as  future.  And  he  looked 
forward  to  that  day  when  he  was  ready  to  die — "  There 
is,"  said  he,  "  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness, 
which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge^  [and  this  is  the 
passage  my  friend  dismissed  as  having  no  judgment  in 


2^3  Oral  Discussion. 

it !]  shall  give  me  at  that  day"  At  '■johat  day  ?  Why, 
of  course,  "that  day  in  which  he  xvill  judge  the  world 
in  righteousness."  "That  day"  was  a  day  to  which 
Paul  looked  foi'waixl  when  he  had  "  finished  his  course." 
And  that  day  in  which  Paul  expected  to  receive  from 
the  righteous  Judge  a  crown  of  righteousness  after  his 
death,  he  connected  with  the  coming  of  Christ,  too;  for 
he  adds  to  what  I  have  quoted — "And  not  to  me  only 
[will  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge,  give  a  crown  of 
righteousness  at  that  day],  but  unto  all  them,  also,  that 
love  his  appearing"  So  here  we  have  the  "  appearing" 
of  Christ,  and  "  that  day  "  in  which  "  he  will  judge  the 
world  in  righteousness,"  all  pointed  forward  to  as  future, 
by  an  apostle  who  had  lived  and  laboi'ed  in  the  king- 
dom, and  was  "  now  ready"  to  die,  having  finished  his 
course.  This  is  perfectly  conclusive,  as  to  the  coming 
of  Christ  and  the  judgment  of  the  world.  I  feel  like 
saying  I  have  here  an  argument  that  can  never  be  met. 

The  gentleman  quotes  i  Peter  iv.  5  :  "Who  shall  give 
account  to  him  who  is  ready  to  judge  the  quick  and  the 
dead" — giving  almost  frightful  emphasis  to  the  word 
"ready."  Why  did  he  not  let  the  word  "shall"  have  a 
shai"e  of  the  emphasis? — "who  shall  give  account  to 
him,"  etc.  Of  course,  Christ  was  "  ready  to  judge  the 
quick  and  dead,"  for  he  had  already  been  "  ordained  to 
be  the  judge  of  the  quick  and  dead."  But  Peter  did  not 
say  he  was  then  .judging  the  quick  and  dead,  as  he 
should  have  said,  if  my  friend  is  right  in  saying  that 
"his  judgment  began  when  his  kingdom  was  set  up;" 
for  his  kingdom  was  already  set  up,  and  Peter  was  in  it. 
So  this  passage  turns  out  terribly  against  my  friend's 
position. 

Then   we   have  James   summoned,  who   says,  "the 


yudgme/it — Punishtnent.  273 

coming  of  the  Lord  draweth  nigh."  So  it  did,  and  it 
has  been  drawing  nearer  ever  since.  But  James  did  not 
speak  of  the  setting  up  of  the  kingdom,  for  that  had 
been  set  up  several  years  before. 

Next,  the  gentleman  quotes  Paul  in  3  Tim.  iv.  i : 
"  Who  shall  judge  the  quick  and  dead  at  his  appearing 
and  his  kingdom."  This  cannot  mean  at  his  appearing- 
to  set  up  his  kingdom,  for  that  was  past.  The  kingdom 
had  been  set  up,  and  Paul  was  in  it.  Christ  "  shall 
judge  the  quick  and  dead  at  his  appearing  [and  the  tri- 
umph of]  his  kingdom  "—when  all  enemies  shall  be 
destroyed,  and  the  kingdom  delivered  up  to  God  the 
Father. 

My  opponent  thinks  the  passage  in  Revelation    that 
speaks  of  the  resurrection,  and  the  judgment  following 
it,  is  quite  figurative,  and  has  been  fulfilled   long  since! 
He  thinks  it  was  all  fulfilled  long  ago,  because  that  book 
was  a  revelation  of  things  "  which,"  it  was  said,  "  must 
shortly  be  done" — »  must  shortly  come  to  pass" — which 
were  "  at  hand,"  etc.     And  so  all  Universalists  contend, 
at  times.     But  it  is  a  fact  somewhat  damaging   to   their 
consistency  in  this  position,  that  when   it  serves   their 
cause  they  quote  the  language  of  this   same  book  and 
give  it  a  future  application — an   application   to   the  im- 
mortal world!     Mr.  Manford  has  done  so,  as  I  can  and 
will  show  if  my  statement  is  questioned !     Of  course  it 
had  "slipped  his  mind"  just  at  that  time  that  this  book 
revealed  only  things  that  were  ''shortly  to  come  to  pass" 
—which  were   "at   hand"— and,   therefore,  long  since 
fulfilled !     If  my  friend  can  quote  the  language  of  this 
book,  and  apply  it  beyond  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
why  may  not  I  contend  that  it  speaks  of  the  resurrection 
and  the  judgment  that  is  to  follow.?     The  fixct  is,  some 


( 


274  Oral  Discussion. 

things  spoken  of  in  this  book  have  been  fulfilled  long 
since;  some  not  so  long  since;  while  some  are  yet  to  be 
fulfilled,  and  among  the  last  are  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  and  the  judgment.  Another  fact  is,  that,  this 
book  was  certainly  written  after  the  setting  up  of  the 
kingdom,  and  hence  after  the  coming  of  Christ  "  in  his 
kingdom ;"  and,  therefore,  the  coming  of  Christ  therein 
spoken  of,  as  in  the  future  when  the  book  was  written, 
was  his  final  coming,  and  not  his  coming  in  his  king- 
dom. That  the  kingdom  had  come  when  John  wrote 
this  book  is  simply  certain,  for  he  says,  in  the  first 
chapter,  when  beginning  to  write,  that  he  was  "  in  the 
kingdom"  of  Jesus  Christ,  at  the  same  time  that  he  was 
"  in  the  isle  of  Patmos." 

What  the  gentleman  said  about  those  passages  I  cited, 
wherein  the  Savior  specified  and  named  certain  persons 
who  should  '•'•rise  tip  in  the  judgment"  with  the  people 
he  addressed,  I  shall  pass,  with  one  word.  He  simply 
assumed  that  the  Savior  meant  nothing ! 

On  the  passage  in  Heb.  ix.  27,  the  gentleman  labored 
so  hard,  that  he  made  a  pretty  heavy  draught  upon  my 
sympathies. 

I.  He  tells  us  that  the  pronoun  "they"  in  the  first 
verse  of  the  following  chapter  "  refers  to  the  noun  men  in 
the  verse  under  consideration ; "  and  that  as  "  they  offered 
sacrifices  year  by  year  continually,"  they  were  "  the 
Jewish  high  priests."  Hence  he  concludes  that  it  was 
"appointed  unto  the  Jewish  high  priests  once  to  die." 
I  deny  that  "they"  of  the  tenth  chapter  i"efers  to  "  men" 
of  the  ninth,  as  its  antecedent.  The  antecedent  to  the 
pronoun  they  is  imderstood  in  the  very  verse  in  which 
it  occurs;  and  there  is,  therefore,  no  necessity  of  going 
on  such  a  journey  backward  to  find  one  for  it.     Again: 


Judgment — PunisJiment.  275 

if  Mr.  Manford's  position  were  coiTect,  Paul  would  have 
said,  "  It  xvas  appointed  unto  men  [that  is,  the  Jewish 
high  priests]  once  to  die,"  etc.  But  when  he  says,  "It 
is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,"  he  shows  that  he 
speaks  of  an  appointment  still  in  force. 

2.  What  was  the  death  that  the  high  priests  died .? 
The  learned  gentleman  tells  us  it  was  "killing  those  ani- 
mals, shedding  their  blood."  But  that  was  a  sacerdotal 
function  that  was  repeated  often — a  duty  that  the  priests 
did  "yeaf  by  year" — whereas  the  text  in  controversy 
says,  "  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die  " — not  often 
— not  "  year  by  year  continually."  What  did  the  high 
priests  do  that  they  did  not  repeat  often.''  Can  the 
gentleman  tell  us.''  All  that  he  said  about  Moses  and 
the  high  priests  dying  typically  is  without  any  foundation 
in  the  Bible.  It  is  extemporized  by  Universalists  to 
evade  the  force  of  the  passage  under  consideration. 
Neither  Moses  nor  the  priests  did  anything  that  was 
called  dying  typically.  Calves,  and  goats,  and  lambs, 
died,  and  their  blood  was  typical  of  the  blood  of  the 
Lamb  of  God.  The  gentleman  might  better  say  those 
calves  and  goats  were  the  gejztlemen  to  whom  it  was 
appointed  to  die  typically ! 

3.  "After  this  the  judgment."  We  are  told  that 
when  "  the  high  priest  disappeared,  and  entered  into  the 
'Holiest  of  all,'"  and  then  reappeared,  "before  the 
people,  he  passed  judgment  upon  them."  Where  did 
the  gentleman  learn  all  this  ?  Is  there  anything  in  the 
Bible  about  it.?  Not  ofie  syllable.  The  Bible  is  just 
as  silent  about  the  priests  passing  judgment  upon  the 
people,  when  they  returned  from  the  Holiest  of  all,  as  it 
is  about  their  dyittg^  and  about  their  dying  it  is  as  silent 
as  is  the  nic^ht  of  the  grave. 


276  07-al  Discussion. 

The  gentleman's  dissertation  upon  the  typical  aspects 
of  the  Jewish  priesthood  was  "  clear  as  mud."  He  told 
us  that  the  priest's  going  into  the  Holiest  of  all  "  typified 
Christ's  entering  paradise;"  that  the  reappearance  of  the 
high  priest  "typified  Christ's  resurrection^  which  was 
his  second  appearing^  Indeed !  Here  the  gentleman 
has  made  a  perfect  "smash  up"  of  his  theology.  Did 
not  the  resuiTection  of  Christ  take  place  before  any  of 
the  apostolic  preaching  was  done,  which  is  recorded  in 
the  book  of  Acts,  and  before  any  of  the  apostolic  epistles 
were  written  ?  Did  not  the  apostles  in  their  sermons,  in 
the  Acts,  and  in  their  epistles  to  the  churches,  often 
speak  of  a  future  coming  of  Christ  and  a  future  judg- 
ment.'* And  has  not  the  gentleman  taken  the  position 
all  along  that  these  references  made  by  the  apostles  to  a 
future  coming  of  Christ  in  judgment  were  to  his  com- 
ing in  his  kingdom,  then  soon  to  take  place  ?  But  now 
he  puts  his  coming  in  his  kingdom  and  in  judgment 
before  all  apostolic  preaching  and  writing!  This  is  a 
terrible  blunder!  and  one  I  was  hardly  expecting  "the 
hero  of  a  hundred  battles"  to  make. 

Now,  I  say  that  the  entering  of  the  high  priest  into 
the  "  Holiest  of  all "  t\'pified  not  Christ's  entering  into 
paradise  after  his  crucifixion,  "  but  into  heaven  itself, 
now  to  appear  in  the  presence  of  God  for  us,  *  *  * 
and  unto  them  that  look  for  him  shall  [not  did.,  at  his 
resurrection]  he  appear  the  second  time  without  sin 
[oftering]  unto  salvation."  Heb.  ix.  24-2S.  His  second 
coming  will  be  his  glorious  appearing,  because  "  he  shall 
come  in  his  ^lory"  from  heaven.,  and  because  his  saints 
shall  be  "raised  in  glory,"  and  shall  "appear  with  him 
in  glory."  He  "shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints." 
The  gentleman  says,  if  I  understand  him  correctly,  that 


yudgment — Punishment.  277 

when  he  rose  from  the  dead — which  he  now  makes  his 
second  coming — "he  showed  himself  to  the  world  in  his 
spiritual  and  glorified  formy  This  I  squarely  deny. 
Jesus  was  not  glorified  till  he  ascended  to  heaven. 

Christ  died  once.  He  entered  into  heaven  once.  He 
made  one  offering  for  sin.  Because  "it  is  apj^ointed 
unto  men  once  to  die ;  but  after  this  the  [one]  judgment." 
Such  is  the  simple  teaching  of  the  passage  under  con- 
sideration. 

Mr.  Alanford  tells  you,  however,  that  I  do  not  believe 
that  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die  a  physical 
death;  and  that  I  am  therefore  inconsistent  in  making 
the  use  I  do  of  this  passage.  He  told  you  all  about 
what  I  do  and  what  I  do  not  believe  about  Adam,  and 
sin,  and  death.  Of  course,  I  am  very  much  obliged! 
But  if  you  wish  to  know  exactly  what  I  think  about 
those  matters,  perhaps  you  might  better  apply  to  7ne. 
Whether  it  was  divinely  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die 
before  " sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death  by  sin" 
or  not,  it  certainly  was  afterward.  "  Dust  thou  art  and 
unto  dust  shalt  thou  return,"  and  "cursed  is  the  earth 
for  thy  sake,"  divinely  appointed  death  unto  all  flesh. 
And  doubtless  this  is  the  very  appointment  the  Apostle 
refers  to  in  the  passage  in  question. 

The  gentleman  tries  to  make  out  the  Bible  somewhat 
absui'd,  because  it  teaches  that  wicked  men  are  unhappy 
and  tormented  before  the  day  of  judgment.  But  there 
is  nothing  absurd  about  it.  Wicked  men,  in  this  world, 
are  unhappy,  miserable,  and  often  imprisoned,  "  resei*ved 
unto  judgment,"  for  a  long  time  before  they  are  sen- 
tenced to  the  punishment  that  the  law  prescribes  as  the 
penalty  for  their  offenses. 

We  are  told  that  there  are  "several  hells"  in  my  the- 


278  Oral  Discussion, 

ology.  The  gentleman  knows,  I  presume,  that  there 
are  three  different  words  in  the  Greek  Testament  trans- 
lated into  the  English  word  hell,  in  the  common  version 
of  the  Bible;  and  is  it  possible  that  he  means  to  trijle 
with  the  English  scholar  on  this  matter?  I  hope  not. 
When  I  tell  you  that  I  rely  merely  upon  the  English 
word  "hell"  to  prove  my  proposition,  then  many  of  the 
sharp  and  funny  things  the  gentleman  gets  oft' — so  ten-i- 
bly  at  the  expense  of  the  gi^avity  one  should  bring  to 
the  discussion  of  this  subject — will  seem  to  have  a  slight 
semblance  of  pertinency  to  the  discussion.  But  now 
all  can  see,  who  wish  to,  that  they  serve  no  worthy  pur- 
pose w^hatever.  The  gentleman  has  his  sport  not  at 
what  I  say,  but  at  what  is  found  in  the  word  of  God. 

In  one  of  the  passages  of  scripture  I  quoted,  the 
phrase,  '•''the  day  of  judgment,"  occurs,  and  Mr.  Manford 
tells  us  it  is  "a  day,  according  to  the  Gi'eek."  That's  a 
little  amusing.  Will  he  be  kind  enough  to  tell  us  what 
the  Greek  for  "a  day"  is? 

The  gentleman  seems  to  think  the  Savior  was  only 
tiying  to  make-believe — in  fact,  was  only  trifling  a  little 
with  his  disciples — when  he  told  them  to  fear  him  who 
was  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  hell  {gehen?ia)^ 
knowing  that  it  was  certain  he  would  never  do  it.  That, 
I  presume  to  say,  was  hardly  satisfactory  to  his  friends 
— I  hope  not  even  to  himself.  Besides,  he  thinks  if  men 
"should  be  literally  destroyed  they  could  not  suffer 
endless  punishment."  I  suppose  he  means  by  this  to 
assume  that  to  "destroy"  means  to  extinguish,  to  annihi- 
late. But  the  word  destroy,  when  used  in  connection 
with  persons,  never  once  has  such  meaning  in  all  its 
scripture  usage.  If  he  thinks  it  does,  let  him  undertake 
to  show  the  fact,  and  I  will^bc  with  him. 


yudgincni — Pu  n  ish  me  fit.  279 

The  gentleman  "kindly  tells"  me  that  I  would  better 
read  fewer  passages  of  scripture,  and  spend  more  time 
trying  to  prove  that  they  sustain  my  position.  But  I 
feel  so  confident  that  the  scriptures  I  advance  teach  just 
what  I  wish  to  establish,  that  the  worthy  gentleman's 
"kindly"  admonition  is  lost  upon  me.  But,  by  way  of 
returning  his  kindness,  I  beg  permission  to  suggest  to 
my  opponent,  that  if  Jesus  and  the  apostles  had  taught 
Universalism,  then  Universalists  would  not  be  laid  under 
the  unpleasant  necessity  of  spending  so  much  of  their 
time  trying  to  prove  that  their  quotations  teach  Uni- 
versalism.    [  Time  expired. 


[mr.  manford's  third  reply.] 

Before  replying  to  Mr.  Sweeney's  last  speech,  I  will 
offer  additional  testimony,  that  God's  judgments  are  in 
the  earth.  According  to  the  Old  Testament,  God  judges 
mankind  in  this  world.  In  proving  this,  I  shall  not 
refer  you  to  the  special  judgments  that  came  on  the  Jews, 
but  to  the  general  providence  of  God.  Adam,  the  first 
man,  sinned,  and  he  was  judged  and  punished.  The 
Judge  of  all  the  earth  revealed  to  him,  that  in  the  day 

HE  SINNED  HE  SHOULD  SURELY  DIE.       Not  a  WOrd  about 

a  judgment  at  the  end  of  time,  not  a  word  about  an 
endless  hell,  endless  punishment,  or  endless  death. 
These  are  all  the  inventions  of  men.  Adam  was  judged 
in  the  day  he  sinned,  was  punished  in  the  day  he  sinned. 
He  died  to  innocence,  to  purity;  died  in  trespasses 
and  sins.  The  law  that  condemned  Adam  is  still  in 
force,  hence  St.  Paul  tells  us,  that  "  death  passed  on  all 
men,  for  that  all  have  sinned."     Rom.  v.   12.     Adam 


2So  Oral  Discussion. 

sinned,  and  he  suffered  the  penalty — moral  death.  All 
men  sin,  and  all  men  suffer  the  penalty — moral  death. 
As  Adam  suffered  it  on  the  day  he  sinned,  all  men  suffer 
it  on  the  day  they  sin.  Here  is  proof  from  the  Old 
Testament,  and  the  New  Testament,  that  God  judges  in 
the  earth.  Listen  to  the  apostle  James  to  the  same  effect : 
"  Blessed  is  the  man  that  endureth  temptation ;  for  when 
he  is  tried,  he  shall  receive  the  crown  of  life."  Mark, 
he  shall  receive  the  crown,  when  he  is  tried.  Virtue, 
then,  is  now  rexuarded.  The  saint  is  now  crowned. 
He  continues,  "  then,  when  lust  hath  conceived,  it  bring- 
eth  forth  sin ;  and  sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth  forth 
death."  James  i.  12,  15.  Here  we  are  taught,  that 
when  the  sinful  deed  is  finished,  is  committed,  then  we 
suffer  the  penalty — death.  Do  not  suffer  the  whole  of 
it  immediately,  but  it  begins  then.  James  and  Paul  only 
repeat  what  the  Lord  revealed  to  the  first  man. 

This  same  truth  runs  through  the  Bible.  I  will  read 
still  more  from  the  Old  Testament:  "  But  the  Lord  shall 
endure  forever;  he  has  prepared  his  throne  for  judg- 
ment. And  he  shall  judge  the  world  in  righteousness ; 
he  shall  minister  judgment  to  the  people  in  upright- 
ness. *  *  The  Lord  is  known  by  the  judgment 
which  he  executeth."  Ps.  ix.  7,  8,  16.  God  is  7iow  on 
the  throne  of  judgment,  he  now  executeth  judgment 
— not  will  do  it  millions  of  ages  hence.  Again,  "  yus- 
tice  and  judgment  are  the  habitation  of  thy  throne." 
Ps.  Ixxxix.  14.  Justice  and  judgment  are  not  held  in 
abeyance  till  the  end  of  time,  but  God  now  deals  justly 
with  the  sons  of  men ;  he  7iow  judges  them.  David  also 
says,  "  The  judgments  of  the  Lord  are  true; "  "  I  will 
praise  thee,  because  of  thy  x\^\iQ.o\\%  judgments ;''^  "thy 
judgments  are  right;"  "upright  are  thy  judgments;" 


yudgjnent — Punishment.  28 1 

"his  judgments  are  in  all  the  earth;"  "  I  saw  tinder  the 
sun  the  place  of  judgment."  All  these  scriptures,  and 
hundreds  more  of  the  same  miport,  teach  that  God 
judges  the  world  now.  This  language  is  all  in  the 
present  tense. 

We  have  seen,  that  during  the  New  Testament  dis- 
pensation, God  judges  the  world  by  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
— by  the  new  light  it  has  infused  into  our  minds  and  our 
morals.  Mr.  Sweeney  puts  the  judgment  off  to  the  end 
of  time.  I  have  proved,  though,  that  it  pertains  to  the 
reign  of  Christ,  and  commenced  when  his  reign  began. 
His  reign  is  on  earth,  and  hence  his  judgment  is  on 
earth.  How  well  this  corresponds  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment predictions  of  the  Messiah's  reign  and  judgment. 
I  will  read  some  of  them :  "  I  saw  in  the  night  vision, 
and,  behold,  one  like  the  Son  of  man  came  with  the 
clouds  of  heaven,  and  came  to  the  Ancient  of  days,  and 
they  brought  him  near  before  him.  And  there  was 
given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  tliat  all 
people,  nations,  and  languages,  should  serve  him:  his 
dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not 
pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  de- 
stroyed." Dan.  vii.  13,  14.  This  is  the  same  coming 
of  "the  Son  of  man"  so  often  spoken  of  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  which  the  Son  of  man  himself  said 
should  take  place  before  some  of  his  heai^ers  would  die. 
Daniel  said  he  would  come  "  with  the  clouds  of  heaven ; " 
and  Christ  said  the  same.  And  when  he  should  come, 
according  to  the  prophet  and  the  Savior,  there  would  be 
"  given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom."  The 
same  is  spoken  of  by  Isaiah :  "  For  unto  us  a  child  is 
born,  unto  us  a  son  is  given :  and  the  govertiment 
shall  be  upon  his  shoulders.  *  *  Of  the  increase  of 
24 


283  Oral  Discussion. 

his  govermncnt  and  peace  there  shall  be  no  end,  upon 
the  throne  of  David,  and  upon  his  kingdom^  to  order  it, 
and  to  establish  it  with,  j udg ment  and  Justice^  Isa.  ix. 
6,  7-  This  is  the  same  government,  kingdom,  and 
judgment  of  Christ,  which  the  New  Testament  informs 
us  commenced  eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  and  which 
my  friend  so  strangely  locates  at  the  end  of  time.  "  Out 
of  Zion  shall  go  forth  the  law — the  law  or  Gospel  of 
Christ — and  the  word  of  the  Lord  from  Jerusalem. 
And  he — Christ — shall  judge  among  the  nations,  and 
rebuke  many  people."  Now  observe,  that  the  result  of 
Christ's  judgment  was  to  be  salvation — not  ruin  to 
countless  millions  in  hell.  "And  they  shall  beat  their 
swords  into  plow-shares,  and  their  spears  into  pruning- 
hooks:  nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  nation, 
neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more.  *  *  The 
Lord  shall  be  exalted  in  that  DAY."  Isa.  ii.  3,  4, 
17.  This  is  the  day  of  judgment  my  friend  locates  at 
the  end  of  the  world;  but  the  prophet  locates  it  on  the 
earth.  The  same  prophet  further  writes,  "  Behold  a 
king  shall  reign  in  rigiiteousness,  and  princes  shall  rule 
in  JUDGMENT.  *  *  Then  judgment  shall  dwell  in 
the  wilderness."  Isa.  xxxii.  i,  16.  "  Behold  my  sei"vant, 
whom  I  uphold ;  mine  elect,  in  whom  my  soul  delight- 
eth;  I  will  put  my  spirit  upon  him;  and  he  shall  bring 
forth  judgment  to  the  Gentiles.  He  shall  not  fail  nor 
be  discouraged,  till  he  hath  set  judgment  in  the 
EARTH."  Isa.  xlii.  I,  4.  This  is  the  same  judgment 
that  Mr.  Sweeney,  against  the  whole  Bible  and  common 
sense,  locates  at  the  end  of  all  things.  Another  prophet, 
speaking  of  this  same  judgment  of  Christ,  says:  "Be- 
hold the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord,  that  I  will  raise 
unto  David  a  righteous  Branch,  and  a  King  shall  reign 


V 


Judgment — Punishment.  283 

and  prosper,  and  shall  execute  judgment  and  justice 
IN  THE  EARTH."     Jer.  xxiii.  5. 

It  will  be  observed,  that  the  prophets  in  predicting 
the  coming  of  Christ,  call  him  the  "  Son  of  man,"  a 
King,  a  Judge.  They  say  he  would  Reign, — have  a 
Government,  a  Kingdom.  They  all  assert,  that  he 
would  exercise  justice  and  judgment  during  his  reign. 
And  they  are  unanimous  in  declaring  that  this  judgment 
would  be  IN  THE  EARTH.  There  can  be  no  doubt, 
that  tills  is  the  same  kingdom,  and  the  same  judgment, 
that  Christ  and  the  apostles  so  often  spoke  of.  The 
prophets  locate  the  kingdom  and  judgment  in  this 
world,  and  the  New  Testament  locates  them  in  this 
world.  "  He  that  hath  ears  to  hear  let  him  hear."  I 
will  now  notice  my  friend's  last  speech,  which  is  a  reply 
to  two  of  mine. 

The  gentleman  again  read  Matt.  xvi.  37,  38,  and  said, 
if  I  could  show  that  the  coming,  in  the  twenty-seventh 
verse,  is  a  past  event,  he  was  "  defeated."  He  is,  then, 
already  defeated,  for  I  have  surely  proved  that.  But,  to 
save  himself,  he  laid  his  hands  on  that  passage,  tore  it 
asunder,  and  threw  several  thousand  years  between  the 
fragments,  and  then  declaimed  that  one  fragment  means 
a  coming  of  Christ  eighteen  hundred  years  ago^  and  the 
other  fragment  means  a  coming,  perhaps,  tot  thousand 
years  hence  I  If  I  should  so  cut  up  the  words  of  our 
Savior,  my  friend  would  justly  be  filled  with  horror. 
But  he  did  this  to  save  himself  from  defeat.  Men  do 
desperate  things  sometimes  to  prevent  defeat.  This 
very  desperation  of  his  is  evidence  enough  that  he  feels 
his  cause  is  ruined.  I  cannot  understand  how  a  sane 
man  can  think  there  are  two  comings  spoken  of  in  that 
passage.     Biblical  students  generally,  of  all  creeds,  con- 


284  Oral   Discussion. 

tend,  that  only  one  coming  is  there  taught.  Dr.  Adam 
Clarke  says  there  is  only  one,  and  takes  the  same  view 
of  the  passage  I  have. 

"This,"  says  he,  "was  the  glorious  mediatorial  king- 
dom which  Jesus  Christ  was  about  to  set  up,  by  the 
destruction  of  the  Jewish  nation  and  polity,  and  the 
diffusion  of  the  Gospel  through  the  whole  world.  *  * 
And  the  next  verse  seems  to  confirm  the  above  explana- 
tion, as  our  Lord  evidently  speaks  of  the  establishment 
of  the  Christian  church  after  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and 
its  final  triumph  after  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish 
polity." 

Dr.  Clarke,  you  see,  contends  there  is  only  one  coining 
spoken  of,  and  that  took  place  long  since.  Dr.  Cappe 
takes  the  same  ground.  "The  dissolution  of  Judea 
(Matt.  xvi.  37),  Is  called  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man 
in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his  angels."  Critical 
Rem.  The  learned  Rosenmullcr  takes  the  same  view  of 
the  passage.  "In  this  passage  (vei'se  27),  reference  Is 
had  to  the  promulgation  of  the  Gospel  through  the 
whole   world."     Dr.    LIghtfoot  understands   it   in   like 


"  His  coming  In  this  place  must  be  understood  of  his 
coming  to  take  vengeance  against  those  enemies  of  his 
which  would  not  have  him  to  rule  over  them.  *  * 
The  day,  the  time,  is  called  'the  day  of  the  Lord,'  his 
'coming  in  the  clouds'  in  his  glory,  in  his  kingdom." 

These  eminent  men  were  all  believers  In  the  day  of 
judgment  my  friend  talks  about,  but  they  were  fully 
persuaded  that  this  passage  does  not  relate  to  that  event. 
If  those  learned  commentators  are  right,  my  friend 
nilght  as  well  acknowledge  he  Is  defeated,  I  do  not  see 
that    it    is  necessaiy  to  notice   all  the   gentleman  said 


yudgment — Punishment.  285 

about  the  passage,  for  his  words  only  darken  counsel. 
The  true  meaning  is  so  evident,  a  school  boy  can  hardly 
fail  to  understand  it.  Christ  first  states  that  he  would 
come;  and  then  when  he  would  come — before  some 
he  addressed  would  die.  Aly  friend  said  that  Jesus,  in 
Matt.  X.,  did  not  say  he  would  come  in  the  glory  of  his 
Father,  etc.  Neither  did  he  say  that  he  would  not.  Does 
not  the  man  know,  that  all  of  Christ's  comings  were  "in 
the  glory  of  his  Father".?  His  coming  in  the  flesh,  in 
his  kingdom,  and  at  the  end  of  his  kingdom,  were  all 
"  in  the  glory  of  his- Father."  Does  he  not  know  that.'' 
No  doubt,  Matt.  x.  and  xvi.  refer  to  the  same  coming. 
This  is  generally  admitted. 

He  then  went  to  Matt,  xxiv.,  where  Christ  again 
spoke  of  coming  in  "  power  and  glory,"  and  contended 
that  coming  has  not  taken  place.  He  said  I  "garbled" 
that  chapter.  No  such  a  thing.  I  will  present  four 
arguments,  showing  that  chapter  was  fulfilled  long 
since. 

I.  It  was  to  be  fulfilled  at  the  end  of  the  Jewish  age, 
and  that  took  place  in  the  first  century.  The  disciples 
asked,  "  What  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming,  and  of 
the  end  of  the  world  ? "  Verse  3.  The  word  rendered 
"world"  is  aion^  and  means  age;  hence  Hammond,  Le 
Clerc,  Whitby,  Pearce,  Doddridge,  Macknight,  Wake- 
field, Kenrick,  and  hosts  of  other  Bible  scholars,  render 
it  age  in  this  place.  The  Jews  divided  the  entire  dura- 
tion of  time  into  two  ages — the  age  before  the  beginning 
of  the  Messiah's  reign,  and  the  age  after.  They  called 
them  this  age  and  the  age  to  come.  When  Christ  was 
on  earth  the  frst  age  was  about  to  end;  and  it  was  con- 
cerning the  end  of  that  age  the  disciples  inquired. 
Through  the  whole  chapter  Jesus  told  them  what  would 


286  Oral  Discussion. 

transpire  before  the  end  of  that  age ;  and  the  coming  of 
Christ  was  one  event  that  would  occur. 

2.  Jesus  in  that  chapter  taught  that  the  end  of  the 
age  was  then  near.  In  verse  6  he  said,  "for  all  these 
things  shall  come  to  pass,  but  the  end  is  not  j^et, "  or  not 
immediately,  as  Luke  has  it.  Dr.  Barnes,  the  well 
known  Presbyterian  commentator,  on  this  says,  "The 
end  of  the  Jewish  economy,"  that  is,  the  end  of  the 
first  age.  Verse  14.  "And  this  Gospel  of  the  kingdom 
shall  be  preached  to  all  the  world  for  a  witness  to  all 
nations,  and  then  shall  the  end  comL"  Dr.  Barnes  says, 
this  was  "  the  end  of  the  Jewish  economy."  Observe, 
the  end  was  to  come  when  the  Gospel  should  be 
preached  to  all  the  world.  The  New  Testament  says 
it  was  pi'cached  in  the  first  century  in  all  the  world. 
"  But  I  say.  Have  they  not  heard  ?  Yes  verily,  their 
sound  went  into  all  the  earth,  and  their  woixls  unto  the 
ends  of  the  world."  Rom.  x.  18.  "If  ye  continue  in 
the  faith  grounded  and  settled,  and  be  not  moved  away 
from  the  hope  of  the  Gospel,  which  ye  have  heard,  and 
which  was  preached  to  every  creature  which  is  under 
heaven ;  whereof  I  Paul  am  made  a  minister."  Col.  i. 
23.  As  soon  as  the  Gospel  should  be  preached  to  all 
the  world,  the  end  was  to  come,  and  Paul  said  a  few 
years  after,  it  had  been  preached  "  unto  the  ends  of  the 
world,"  therefore  the  end  of  the  age  took  place  long 
since.  Here  is  another  evidence,  that  Christ's  coming 
in  "power  and  glory"  is  a  joast  event,  for  he  was  to 
come  at  the  end  of  that  age. 

3.  The  coming  in  power  and  glory  was  to  transpire 
in  that  generation.  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,"  said 
Christ,  "This  generation  shall  not  pass  till  all  these 
things  be  fulfilled."     Verse  34.      The  gentleman  said, 


"^  jMcigment — Punishment.  287 

generation  means  race.  Turn  to  the  first  chapter  of 
this  book  and  see  the  wisdom  the  gentleman  displayed. 
'•  The  book  of  the  generation  of  Christ" — race  of  Christ, 
according  to  my  learned  brother.  "  So  all  the  genera- 
tions (races)  from  Abraham  to  David  are  fourteen 
generations  (races) ;  and  from  David  until  the  carrying 
away  into  Babylon  are  fourteen  generations  [races) ; 
and  from  the  cariying  into  Babylon  unto  Christ  are 
fourteen  generations  {races)."  The  gentleman  exhibits 
wonderful  wisdom  in  the  meaning  of  words.  He  must 
have  been  consulting  that  curious  dictionary  of  his 
again.  He  ought  to  know  that  the  primary  meaning  is 
not  race.  I  will  read  Greenfield's  definition  of  the 
Greek.  "A  family,  generation,  descent;  an  age,  race, 
or  generation  of  men,  including,  upon  the  average,  a 
space  of  thirty  years."  Instead  of  race  being  the 
primary  meaning,  it  is  the  fifth  meaning,  which  is  always 
the  secondary  meaning.  Learned  critics  testify  to  the 
same.     Dr.  Whitby  says : 

"These  words  —  this  generation  shall  not  pass  away 
—  afibrd  a  full  demonstration  that  all  which  Christ 
had  said  hitherto,  was  to  be  accomplished,  not  at  the 
conversion  of  the  Jews,  not  at  the  final  judgment  day, 
but  in  that  very  age,  or  whilst  some  of  that  generation 
of  men  lived;  for  the  phrase  never  bears  any  other 

SENSE    IN    THE    NeW    TeSTAMENT,  THAN    THE    MEN  OF 

THIS  AGE." — Com.  on  Matt.  xxiv.  34. 

That  is  to  the  point.     Lightfoot  agrees  with  him : 

"This  generation  shall  not  pass,  etc.  Hence  it  appears 
plain  enough,  that  the  foregoing  verses  are  not  to  be 
iniderstood  of  the  last  judgment,  but  of  the  destruction 
of  the  Jewish  state." — Com.  on  Matt.  xxiv.  34. 

Well,  Christ  was  to  come  in  the  generation  in  which 


28S  Oral   Discussion. 

he  lived — another  conclusive  evidence  that  my  friend  is 
wrong,  and  lie  had  better  acknowledge  he  is  defeated^ 
for  there  never  was  a  man  defeated,  if  he  is  not. 

4.  One  more  evidence,  that  coming  was  soon  to 
take  place.  Jesus  told  the  disciples  in  that  same  chapter 
that  they  would  live  to  see  him  come.  "  Pray  ye,"  said 
he  to  them,  "  that  your  flight  be  not  in  the  winter,  *  * 
for  THEN  shall  be  great  tribulation,  *  *  *  immedi- 
ately after  the  tribulation  of  those  days,  *  *  *  and 
THEN  shall  appear  the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  in 
heaven ;  *  *  they  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  coming. 
*  *  So  likefvise  YE,"  my  disciples,  "when  YE  shall 
SEE  all  these  things,  know  that  it  is  near,  even  at  the 
door.  Verily  I  say  unto  YOU,  This  generation  shall 
not  pass  till  all  these  things  be  fulfilled."  You  see 
Christ  connects  all  the  events  of  that  chapter,  and  tells 
the  disciples  THEY  would  SEE  them  all  transpire. 
I  have  not  time  to  read  the  whole  chapter,  but  hope  you 
will  do  so  at  the  first  opportunity. 

This  chapter,  then,  aflbrds  four  positive  proofs,  that 
the  coming  in  "power  and  glory"  was  to  transpire  soon, 
when  Christ  was  on  earth;  and  these,  connected  with 
his  declaration  that  there  were  some  standing  near  him 
who  would  not  die  till  he  should  come,  make  it  beyond  all 
doubt,  that  the  coming  in  glory  and  power  was  an  event 
near  at  hand.  Dr.  Clarke  ajjplies  this  coming  "in 
power  and  glory"  to  events  then  at  hand. 

" '  Then  shall  appear  the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  in 
heaven.'  The  plain  meaning  of  this  is,  that  tlie 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  will  be  such  a  remarkable 
instance  of  divine  vengeance,  such  a  signal  manifesta- 
tion of  Christ's  'power  and  glory,' that  all  the  Jewish 
tribes  shall  mourn,  and  many  will,  in  consequence  of 
this  manifestation  of  God,  be  led  to  acknowledge  Christ 
and  his  religion." 


Judgment — Punishment.  289 

Rev.  A.  Campbell  is  also  against  Mr.  Sweeney.  He 
says: 

"  Some  of  the  disciples  not  only  saw  the  Son  of  man 
enter  upon  his  reign,  and  the  kingdom  of  God  come  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  carry  its  conquest  over  Judea, 
Samaria,  and  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth,  but 
they  SAW  the  Lord  'come  with  power'  and  awful 
GLORY,  and  accomplish  all  his  predictions  on  the  deserted 
and  devoted  temple,  city  and  people."' — "  Ch.  Restored^'' 
p.  174. 

Nothing  can  be  plainer  than,  that  the  coming  of  Christ 
"in  power  and  glory,"  was  soon  to  transpire,  when  Christ 
was  on  earth.  This  is  as  clear  as  crystal  from  Christ's 
words,  from  Paul's  words,  from  John's  words,  from 
Peter's  words.  And  Ave  have  seen  that  the  most  eminent 
Methodist,  Baptist,  Presbyterian  and  Episcopalian  theo- 
logians take  this  view  of  that  coming.  And  Mr.  Camp- 
bell, the  most  intelligent,  learned,  and  prominent  man  in 
my  friend's  church,  endorses  the  same.  My  friend  stands 
almost  alone.  He  has  said,  if  I  proved  that  the  coming 
"in  power  and  glory"  is  past,  he  was  defeated.  He 
certainly  is  defeated  —  defeated  by  inspiration,  reason, 
and  common  sense — defeated  by  the  learned  world  — 
defeated  by  his  own  brother  Campbell.  But  perhaps 
he  is  like  Gen.  Taylor's  soldiers  on  a  certain  occasion — 
"  whipped,  but  did  not  know  it." 

The  gentleman  admitted,  that  "last  days"  sometimes 
mean  the  last  days  of  the  Jewish  dispensation.  Very 
well.  He  also  said,  we  must  determine  by  the  connec- 
tion what  time  is  referred  to.  Agreed.  The  passa^-e 
in  2  Peter  iii.  determines  that  Christ  was  to  come  in  the 
"last  days;"  and  during  those  "last  days,"  scoffers,  walk- 
ing after  their  own  lusts,  were  to  say,  "  Where  is  the 
35 


290  Oral  Dtsaission. 

promise  of  his  coming?"  Now,  if  it  can  be  proved, 
that  those  "scoffers"  were  Hving  when  Peter  wrote  that 
epistle,  of  course  the  "  last  days  "  had  come,  and  Christ 
was  about  to  appear.  Speaking  of  the  scoffers,  Peter 
said,  "For  this  they  —  the  scoffers  —  willingly  ARE 
ignorant" — not  shall  be  at  some  future  time.  The 
scoffers  were  living  and  scoffing  when  Peter  penned  the 
passage.  They  are  called  antichrists.  "  Little  children, 
it  is  the  last  time;  and  as  ye  have  heard  that  antichrist 
—  or  scoffers  —  shall  come,  even  now  are  there  many 
antichrists;  whereby  we  know  it  is  the  last 
TIME."  I  John  ii,  18.  The  matter  is  settled.  Christ 
was  to  appear  in  "power  and  glory"  in  judgment,  in 
the  "last  days."  In  those  "last  days"  scoffers  or  anti- 
christs were  to  appear.  And  as  they  were  living  when 
Peter  and  John  wrote,  the  "last  days"  had  come,  and 
Christ  was  about  to  appear.  Here  is  another  evidence 
that  the  gentleman  is  defeated,  whether  he  knows  it  or 
not.  The  "inheritance"  and  the  "salvation"  in  i  Pe- 
ter i.  are  two  different  things.  In  the  "last  days"  of  the 
Jewish  dispensation,  distress  and  tribulation  were  to  come 
on  the  people,  as  Matt.  xxiv.  teaches;  and  the  faithful 
were  to  be  saved  from  them.  The  Bible  speaks  of 
temporal  salvation  as  well  as  spiritual,  as  my  friend 
ought  to  know. 

The  gentleman  denied  several  things  "squarely,"  to 
use  his  word.  He  might  "squarely"  deny  there  is  a 
God,  but  that  would  hardly  prove  there  is  no  God.  So 
he  may  "squarely"  deny  all  the  Nev^  Testament  and 
Old  Testament  say  about  Christ's  judgment  being  in 
the  earthy  but  we  shall  want  something  besides  his 
"square"  denial. 

The  gentleman  tried  to  make  a  distinction  between 


Judgment — Punishment.  291 

Christ's  judging  by  his  zvord  and  judging  personally. 
It  is  a  useless  eftbrt.  The  Bible  says,  "Verily  there  is  a 
God  that  jUDGETH  IN  TPiE  EARTH,  but  he  judges  by  the 
la-ws  he  has  established.  So  Christ  judges  in  the  earth; 
but  it  is  by  the  word  of  truth.  That  answers  all  he 
said  on  that  subject.  Again,  he  said,  the  judgment  was 
future  in  Paul's  day,  and  I  represent  it  as  having  com- 
menced. It  was  present  and  future.  It  had  com- 
menced, and  would  continue  till  the  whole  world  should 
submit  to  the  rule,  reign,  government,  judgment  of 
Christ.  It  commenced  in  Christ's  day,  but  was  not  fully 
established  till  many  years  after.  Rewards  and  punish- 
ments are  present  and  future,  because  men  not  only  live 
noiv^  but  will  live  in  the  fziture.  The  gentleman  further 
said,  that  the  kingdom  was  set  up  on  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost, and  I  represent  it  as  not  being  set  up  then.  The 
truth  is,  it  was  commenced  in  the  days  of  Christ,  and 
has  been  extending  farther  and  farther  ever  since.  It 
has  not  yet  come  to  many  hearts,  and  Christ  has  not 
yet  come  to  many  hearts.  But  before  the  Savior's  work 
shall  be  finished,  that  kingdom  will  be  set  up  in  every 
heart,  and  Christ  will  come  to  every  heart.  It  takes  only 
a  few  words  to  answer  his  little  objections.  Yes,  Felix 
not  only  "  lost  his  office,"  but  was  disgraced  at  home 
and  abroad,  like  Arnold  and  Burr  of  this  land.  But  that 
judgment  v^^as  nothing  in  Air.  Sweeney's  estimation. 
Nothing  but  a  big  blazing,  roaring,  roasting  furnace  is 
any  judgment  in  his  estimation.  He  cannot  comprehend 
how  a  man  can  "  tremble"  in  view  of  a  temporal  judg- 
ment at  his  door.     That  is  past  his  comprehension. 

He  said,  "  I  deny  that  '  they,'  in  Hebrews,  refers  to 
'  men '  as  its  antecedent."  He  may  deny  it  till  his  hair 
shall  be  gray,  but  all  that  will  not  set  aside  the  rules  of 


293  Oral  Discussion. 

grammar.  Any  school  boy  or  girl  knows  "  men"  is  the 
antecedent  of  '*  they."  But  then  grammar,  rhetoric,  com- 
mon sense,  must  all  give  way,  when  my  friend  makes  a 
"square"  denial.  As  "they"  does  refer  to  "  men,"  of 
course,  Paul  speaks  only  of  the  priests  who  offered 
sacrifices.  He  said,  "  Moses  did  not  die  typically." 
He  died  some  kind  of  a  death.  Says  Paul,  "For  where 
a  testament  is,  there  must  also  of  necessity  be  the  death 
OF  THE  TESTATOR.  For  a  testament  is  of  force  after 
MEN  ARE  DEAD."  Now,  Moscs  was  the  testator  of  the 
testament  while  he  was  living  in  the  flesh.  He  must, 
then,  have  died  some  kind  of  a  death  before  he  died 
temporally.  That  is  a  plain  case.  The  connection 
shows  what  kind  of  a  death  it  was.  Blood  was  shed  on 
the  altar,  a  sacrifice  was  inade,  and  that  is  called  the 
death  of  the  testator,  and  that  gave  the  testament 
"force."  It  is  of  no  use  to  deny  this.  Well,  the  high 
priests  were  appointed  to  offer  the  same  sacrifice-^to  die 
the  same  death.  They  were  appointed  once  to  do  it — 
once  at  the  Annual  Atonement,  and  only  once  on  that 
occasion.  But  the  judgment  connected  with  that  typical 
death  my  friend  does  not  understand.  I  will  read 
Moses'  instruction  to  the  priests :  "  And  thou  shalt  make 
a  breast-plate  of  judgment.  *  *  And  Aaron  shall 
bear  the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel  in  the  breast- 
plate oi  judgment  upon  his  heart,  w^hen  he  goeth  in 
unto  the  holy  place.  *  *  And  thou  shalt  put  in  the 
breast-plate  oi  judgment  the  Urim  and  the  Thummlm; 
and  they  shall  be  w^ow  Aaron's  heart  when  he  goeth 
before  the  Lord :  and  Aaron  sliall  bear  the  judgmcfit 
of  the  children  of  Israel  upon  his  heart  before  the  Lord 
continually."  Ex.  xxviii.  15,  39,  30.  The  priest,  when 
he  offered  sacrifices  for  the  sins  of  the  people,  when   he 


Judgment — PunisJunent.  293 

went  into  the  "  Holiest  of  all,"  carried  this  breast-plate 
oi  judgment  on  his  heart,  and  when  he  was  through, 
the  judgment  was,  that  an  atonement  had  been  made  for 
the  worshipers;  their  sins  were  forgiven;  they  were 
clean  from  all  their  sins  before  the  Lord.  Lev.  xvi.  30. 
That  was  typical  of  the  atonement  that  Christ  has  made 
for  the  sins  of  the  world. 

Christ's  resurrection  was  his  second  appearing  to  the 
world.  Is  not  that  a  fact,  let  it  "  smash  up"  whom  it 
may.^  It  may  "smash  up"  Mr.  Sweeney's  isms,  but  it 
harms  nothing  I  have  said.  All  the  questions  he  asked 
right  here,  only  showed  he  did  not  know  what  he  was 
talking  about.  Christ  appeared  to  the  world  in  the  flesh. 
He  appeared  to  the  world  after  his  resurrection  several 
times ;  Paul  names  six  different  appearings,  one  of  which 
was  to  him  on  the  day  of  his  conversion.  He  also  ap- 
peared to  John  on  Patmos  several  times.  And  yet  the 
gentleman  tells  us,  that  the  second  appearing  has  not 
yet  taken  place ! !  He  has  forgotten  that  he  told  us  he 
believed  Christ  came  in  his  kingdom  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost.  Now  he  thinks,  that  was  no  coming  at  all 
on  that  occasion;  and  that  the  second  coming  is  away 
in  the  distant  future!     What  will  he  not  say  next.'' 

It  seems  he  thinks  man  was  made  immortal.  That  it 
was  in  the  first  place  "appointed  "  that  man  never  should 
die.  But  Adam  sinned,  and  then  there  was  another  ap- 
pointment. It  was  then  "  appomted"  that  all  men  should 
die  because  Adam  sinned.  That  one  sin  of  one  man 
damned  his  race.  What  kind  of  justice  was  that.''  It  is 
the  same  kind  of  justice,  that  would  torment  millions 
endlessly  for  the  sins  of  this  brief  life.  But  my  friend 
is  not  exactly  orthodox.  In  a  noted  book  of  his  denom- 
ination, written  by  a  noted  man,  I  find  the  following : 


294  Oral  Discussioji. 

"  In  the  victory  that  the  serpent  gained  over  our  first 
parents  he  has  murdered  our  race."  Scheme  of 
Redemption.,  page  43.  It  is  the  serpent.,  then,  that  has 
appointed  the  death  of  all  men,  and  he  does  his  bloody 
work  by  murdering  them.  After  the  devil  murders  all 
men  physically.,  the  good  Lord  vv^ill  murder  nearly  all  of 
them  spiritually — so  we  are  taught.  The  devil,  though, 
does  his  murderous  work  quick.,  but  the  Lord  will  be 
eternally  about  it — so  we  are  taught.  Error  to  be  hated, 
needs  but  to  be  seen. 

My  friend  said,  "The  gentleman  tries  to  make  out 
the  Bible  somewhat  absurd  because  it  teaches  that 
wicked  men  are  punished  before  the  judgment."  If  he 
had  said  Mr.  Sweeney  instead  of  "  the  Bible,"  he  would 
have  told  the  truth.  The  Bible  does  not  teach  that  mil- 
lions will  be  in  hell  ten  or  twenty  thousand  years  before 
they  will  be  judged,  as  my  friend  does.  But  he  thinks 
there  are  parallels  to  this  on  earth.  "  Wicked  men,"  he 
said,  "are  often  imprisoned  before  sentenced;"  before 
trial  and  sentence,  he  meant.  That  is  so.  But  nearly 
all  are  hailed  out  till  the  day  of  trial.  Are  most  that  go 
to  my  friend's  hell  bailed  out  till  the  judgment  day.''  A 
very  considerable  portion  who  are  cojnmitted,  are  ac- 
quitted on  the  day  of  trial.  Does  my  friend  expect  that 
any,  after  being  in  hell  ten  or  twenty  thousand  years, 
will  be  acquitted,  pronounced  innocejtt,  at  the  judgment 
day.^  It  would  be  sad,  indeed,  if,  at  the  judgment,  it 
should  be  found  that  many  innocent  persons  had  been 
in  hell,  " tormented  in  those  flames"  several  thousand 
years,  when  they  should  have  been  in  heaven.  Then,  if 
innocent  ones  are  in  hell,  guilty  ones  may  be  in  heaven; 
and,  after  the  judgment,  will  have  to  take  up  their 
endless  abode  in  the  hot  regions.     Then,  if  the  parable 


Judgment — Punishment.  295 

of  the  Rich  Man  refers  to  this  heaven  and  hell  between 
death  and  the  judgment,  the  rich  man  may  prove  him- 
self innocent,  and  so  go  to  heaven ;  and  Abraham  and 
the  poor  man  may  be  proved  guilty  and  sentenced  to 
endless  wo.  It  occurs  to  me,  that  those  innocent  ones 
in  hell  so  long  ought  to  have  some  redress  for  jalse  im-* 
prison?)ient. 

You  see  it  only  makes  my  friend's  hells  and  judgment 
more  hideous  to  compare  them  to  anything  in  this 
world. 

He  asked  a  question  about  "  a  day  of  judgment." 
Will  he  say  I  am  incorrect.^  I  intend  to  give  his  "  hells" 
considerable  ventilating  before  I  am  through,  and  will 
say  no  more  about  them  now.     [  Time  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  fourth  speech.] 

The  gentleman  tells  you  his  opponent  is  "  defeated." 
He  doubtless  feels  that  it  is  necessary  for  him  to  advise 
you  of  the  fact,  lest,  otherwise,  you  should  never  find  it 
out.  He  thinks,  however,  that  I  am  "  like  Gen.  Taylor's 
soldiers"  at  the  battle  of  Buena  Vista:  "They  were 
whipped,  but  did  not  know  it."  I  think  I  am  "  like  Gen. 
Taylor's  soldiers  "  in  another  particular.  If  they  were 
whipped,  their  enemy  never  found  it  out.  But  all  the 
loud  talk  and  stamping  of  feet,  that  the  gentleman  put 
in,  over  what  he  called  my  "  defeat,"  was  mere  bluster, 
to  boost  a  feeble  cause.  How  am  I  "  defeated"  }  Why, 
the  gentleman  claims  to  have  shown,  that  the  coming  of 
Christ  "  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  his  angels,"  Matt, 
xvi.  37,  and  his  "  coming  in  his  kingdom"  of  the  next 
verse,  are  one  and  the  same  thing.     But  hoxv  did  he  show 


296  Oral  Discussion. 

this  ?  How  did  he  attempt  to  show  it  ?  He  simply  read 
the  opinion  of  a  few  uninspired  men,  agreeing  with  his 
view  of  the  passage.  "  Dr.  Clarke,"  and  "  Dr."  some- 
body else,  "  thought "  the  two  events  described  in  the 
passage  were  <3«e .' and  then  followed  all  that  vaporing 
vOver  my  "  defeat" !  It  matters  very  little  with  me,  if  the, 
gentleman  did  but  know  it,  what  Doctors  think  in  a  case 
so  plain  as  the  one  in  hand.  I  say  the  passage  speaks  of 
two  events,  because  it  tiames  two  events;  and  of  two 
different  events,  because  it  describes  thein  differently. 
The  gentleman  tells  you,  that  to  save  myself,  I  laid  my 
hands  upon  the  passage,  "  tore  it  asunder,  and  threw  sev- 
eral thousand  years  between  the  fragments."  Desperate 
work!  But  I  say  the  passage  was  "asunder"  when  I 
found  it.  The  audience  saw  it,  too,  and  the  gentleman, 
in  his  defeat,  was  }iot  exactly  like  "  Gen.  Taylor's  sol- 
diers." He  found  it  out.  And,  therefore,  as  persons  in 
distress  generally  do,  he  called  aloud  for  the  Doctors. 
And  the  veiy  first  Doctor  he  called  in  was  one  who  is 
not  trusted  in  his  own  family !  Doctor  Clarke  is  repudi- 
ated even  by  the  Methodists!  Everybody,  however, 
proves  his  doctrine  by  Dr.  Clarke.  Then,  it  turns  out , 
that  the  gentleman  claims  I  am  "  defeated,"  simply 
because  certain  Doctors  did  not  understand  this  particular 
passage  as  I  do.  That 's  all.  And  yet  all  these  Doctors, 
as  to  the  proposition  we  are  debating,  are  with  me ;  which 
shows  that,  in  their  judgment,  my  friend  can  be  allowed 
all  he  claims  as  to  this  particular  passage,  and  still  be 
defeated  as  to  the  main  question  between  us.  If,  there- 
fore, the  opinion  of  these  Doctors  is  decisive,  as  to  scrip- 
ture teaching,  my  opponent  is  defeated — defeated,  too,  at 
the  very  bar  to  which  he  himself  appealed.  But  I  will 
not  allow  the  gentleman  as  much  as  the  Doctoi's  do.     I 


Judgment — Punishment.  297 

say  that  the  coming  of  Christ  "  in  his  glory  with  his 
angels  "  is  one  thing,  and  his  coming  "  in  his  kingdom  " 
is  another,  and  quite  a  different  thing.  The  latter  is  past, 
the  former  is  not.  The  latter  means  the  same  as  "  the 
kingdom  of  God  coming  with  power,"  and  took  place 
in  the  lifetime  of  some  who  saw  the  Savior.  With  the 
latter,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  never  connected ; 
neither  the  judgment  of  the  world  nor  the  glory  of  the 
saints.  With  the  former,  the  resurrection,  the  judgment, 
the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  the  glory  of  the 
saints  are  all  connected.  Christ  entered  upon  his  reign, 
or  came  "  in  his  kingdom,"  in  the  lifetime  of  his  apos- 
tles. Hi  nee  they  claimed  to  be  "in  the  kingdom." 
But  at  the  same  time  that  they  claimed  to  be  in  the  king- 
dom— impl  .ing,  of  course,  that  Christ  had  come  "  in  his 
kingdom" — they  often  spoke  of  di  future  coming,  which 
was  not  his  coming  in  his  kingdom.  With  this  future 
coming  they  connected  the  resuirection  of  the  dead,  the 
judgment,  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  the  glory 
of  the  saints.  This  future  coming  they,  of  course,  never 
called  his  coming  in  his  kingdom,  that  being  past;  but 
they  described  it  as  his  "  glorious  appearing,"  his  coming 
"  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints" — to  raise  them  from  the 
dead  "  in  gloiy" — to  change  their  "  vile  body  "  and  fashion 
it  "  like  unto  his  glorious  body."  The  "  hope  "  of  the 
church  is,  in  scripture  teaching,  most  intimately  connected 
with  the  "  glorious  appearing  "  of  the  Son  of  God,  If 
that  is  past,  then  the  resurrection  is  past ;  the  resurrection 
to  glory,  honor,  and  immortality ;  and  the  hope  of  the  Gos- 
pel was  realized  (by  whom  God  only  knows !)  somewhere, 
I  suppose,  about  the  time  Jerusalem  was  destroyed ;  an 
event  that  I  have  no  idea  one  in  a  hundred  of  the  Chris- 
tians to  whom  Paul  wrote  (of  the  "  glorious  appearing 


298  Oral  Discussion. 

of  our  Savior  Jesus  Christ,"  promising  them  that  when 
Christ  should  appear  they  sliould  "  appear  with  liira  in 
glory")  ever  heard! 

How  many  of  the  Colossians  (to  wliom  Paul  said, 
"  when  Christ  who  is  our  life  shall  appear  then  shall  ye 
also  appear  with  him  in  glory")  ever  heard  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  ?  In  what  "  glory  "  did  they 
"  appear  with  "  Christ  at  that  time  ?  Will  the  gentleman 
tell  us,  and  thereby  let  us  know  what  the  "  glory  "  of 
Universalism  is?  Before  finally  dismissing  the  passage 
in  Matt.  xvi.  2']^  28,  I  wish  to  inake  one  other  remark, 
which  is  this:  It  is  not  at  all  uncommon  for  two  events 
to  be  recorded  in  two  consecutive  sentences,  that,  chrono- 
logically, stand  thousands  of  years  apart,  as  in  this  pas- 
sage. If  this  statement  is  questioned,  I  will  make  it 
good. 

The  gentleman  tells  us  that  "  all  of  Christ's  comings 
were  in  the  'glory  of  his  Father.'"  Such  a  statement 
serves  only  confusion,  and  is  utterly  without  foundation 
in  truth.  Some  such  statement  must  be  made,  however, 
to  hide  distinctions  that  inight  otherwise  be  apparent. 
As  I  have  said,  the  coming  of  Christ  "  in  glory,"  his 
"  glorious  appearing,"  is  always  connected  with  the  res- 
urrection of  the  dead  and  the  judgment. 

Next,  the  gentleman  went  to  the  24th  of  Matthew, 
and  I  shall  follow  him.  And  now  let  it  be  distinctly 
understood,  that  the  point  before  us  for  determination  is 
the  coming  of  Christ  "  in  his  glory."  The  gentleman 
imdertakes  to  show  that  that  is  past,  by  what  the  Savior 
himself  taught  in  this  chapter.  He,  as  is  his  custom, 
made  a  good  many  loose  statements  about  what  is  here 
taught,  that  I  have  not  time  to  call  up  in  order;  but  I 
have  ample  time  to  show  that  this  passage  has  nothing 
in  it  for  his  cause. 


jfudgmeit  t — Pu  nlsh  men  t.  299 

All  that  the  Savior  said,  as  recorded  in  this  chapter, 
was  called  out  by  a  threefold  question,  propounded  by 
his  disciples,  as  recorded  verse  3  :  "  And  as  he  sat  upon 
the  mount  of  Olives,  the  disciples  came  unto  him  pri- 
vately, saying.  Tell  us,  when  shall  these  things  be?  and 
what  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming?  and  of  the  end  of 
the  world  ?"  That  "  these  things  "  relate  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  temple,  which  the  Savior  had  just  foretold, 
we  are  agreed.  That  "  thy  coming,"  is  the  coming  in  con- 
troversy, I  will  grant,  though  many  who  agree  with  me 
on  the  main  question  in  controversy,  do  not.  The  "  end 
of  the  world,"  the  gentleman  says,  means  the  "  end  of 
the  Jewish  age ;"  and  many  critics,  who  are  with  me  on 
the  main  question  in  controversy,  agree  with  him.  But 
I  have  never  seen  satisfactory  proof  of  it.  The  primary 
idea  of  the  word  aion^  here  rendered  "  world,"  is,  I  think, 
periodicity.  It  means  a  period ;  sometimes,  perhaps,  no 
more  than  the  Jewish  age;  sometimes,  certainly,  the 
world,  as  we  now  use  the  word  world.  But  what  it 
means  in  this  passage  matters  not.  I  mean  to  show  that 
Christ  did  not  co//ze  when  Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  and, 
consequently,  if  that  was  the  "  end  of  the  world,"  spoken 
of  in  the  passage,  he  did  not  come  at  the  end  of  the 
world.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  never,  in  scrip- 
ture, called  the  "  end  of  the  world."  Moreover,  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  not  the  end  of  the  Jewish 
age.  The  Jewish  age  ended  before  the  Christian  age 
began.  Paul  lived  in  the  Christian  age,  and  hence  he 
said  the  ends  of  the  ages  [the  latter  end  of  the  Jewish 
and  beginning  of  the  Christian]  came  upon  him  and  his 
contemporaries.  See  i  Cor.  x.  ir.  Christ  died  in  the 
end  of  the  Jewish  age.  Hence,  says  Paul :  "  But  now 
once  in  the  end  of  the  world    hath  he  appeared  to  put 


300  Oral  Discussion. 

away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself."  Heb.  ix.  26. 
When  Christ  died  the  Jewish  dispensation  was  at  an  end; 
when  he  ascended  and  gave  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Christian 
age  began.  However,  the  matter  now  in  hand  is  the 
coming  of  Christ.  Does  he  teach  in  this  chapter  that  he 
would  come  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem .'*  That's 
the  question.     My  friend  says,  yes ;  I  say,  no. 

Observe,  the  Savior  does  not  say  or  intimate  that 
"  these  things,"  (the  destruction  of  the  temple  just  fore- 
told) "  the  end  of  the  world,"  (be  it  what  it  may)  and 
his  "coming,"  should  occur  at  one  and  the  same  time. 
Here  is  where  my  friend  indulged  that  special  weakness 
of  his — assumed  what  is  not  in  the  passage. 

It  will  be  gi'anted,  that  from  the  15th  verse  of  the 
chapter  to  the  22d,  inclusive,  the  Savior  speaks  of  "  these 
things" — that  is,  of  the  destruction  of  the  city  of  Jerusa- 
lem and  of  the  temple.  And  having  described  that 
affair,  at  the  23d  verse  he  says:  "  Then  [at  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem]  if  any  man  shall  say  unto  you,  Lo, 
here  is  Christ,  or  there,  believe  it  7iotr  Why  not,  if  Mr. 
Manford  is  right  .^  Why  not  look  for  him  precisely  at 
that  time.''  Let  the  Savior  himself  answer:  "  For  [this 
reason]  there  shall  arise  false  Christs,  and  false  prophets, 
and  shall  show  great  signs  and  wonders;  insomuch  that 
if  it  were  possible  they  shall  deceive  the  very  elect." 
Verse  24.  '•'•False  Christs"  were  to  come  at  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Which  one  of  them  does  my 
friend  claim.''  His  Christ  came  then,  he  says,  and  I  con- 
clude therefore  that  his  must  have  been  one  of  the  "false 
Christs  "  that  were  to  arise  about  that  time.  What  was 
the  name  of  my  friend's  "  colossal  man"  that  came  at 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.''  Is  it  possible  that  my 
opponent  is  one  of  the  "  false  prophets,"  whose  coming 


Judg7ne7it — PuJiisJiment.  301 

the  Savior  foretold,  and  that  he  is  now  trying-  "  to  deceive 
the  very  elect"  ? !  But  let  us  hear  further  from  the  Savior  : 
"  Behold,  I  have  told  you  before ;  wherefore  if  they  shall 
say  unto  you.  Behold,  he  is  in  the  desert;  go  not  forth; 
Behold,  he  is  in  the  secret  chambers;  BELIEVE  IT 
NOT.  For  as  the  lightning  cometh  out  of  the  east,  and 
shineth  even  unto  the  west,  so  shall  also  the  coming  of 
the  Son  of  Man  be."  Verses  26,  37.  This  means, 
that  "  every  eye  shall  see  him"  when  he  comes — that  all 
shall  know  when  he  comes.  But  to  make  this  still  clearer, 
he  proceeds  to  say :  "  For  wheresoever  the  carcass  is, 
there  shall  the  eagles  be  gathered  together."  When 
Christ  shall  come,  his  disciples  shall  "  be  gathered 
together"  unto  him.  And  this  perfectly  harmonizes  with 
other  scriptures.  Paul  said  to  the  Christians  at  Thessa- 
lonica :  "  Now  we  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  coming 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  by  our  gathering  together 
unto  him."  And  to  the  Colossians :  "  When  Christ, 
who  is  our  life,  shall  appear,  then  shall  ye  also  appear 
with  him  in  glory."  And  were  these  Christians  "  gath- 
ered togedier  unto  "  Christ,  or  did  they  appear  with  him 
in  glory,  when  Jerusalem  was  destroyed }  What  few 
Christians  wei'e  there  were  scattered  among  the  hills  of 
Judea.  But  they  were  not  Thessalonians  or  Colossians. 
But  let  us  proceed  with  the  examination  of  this  chap- 
ter.    Beginning  at  verse  39,  we  read : 

"  Immediately  after  the  tribulation  of  those  days,  shall 
the  sun  be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her 
light,  and  the  stars  shall  fall  from  heaven,  and  the  powers 
of  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken :  and  then  shall  appear 
the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man  in  heaven ;  and  then  shall  all 
the  tribes  of  the  earth  mourn,  and  they  shall  see  the  Son 
of  man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and 
great  glory.     And  he  shall  send  his  angels  with  a  great 


303  Oral  Disaissio7i. 

sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  they  shall  gather  together  his 
elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  one  end  of  heaven  to  the 
other." 

Having  just  taught  his  disciples  not  to  expect  him 
at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  he  now  lets  them  know 
that  the  "  sign"  of  his  coming  shall  appear  in  heaven 
"  after  the  tribulation  of  those  days."  The  "  sign"  was, 
of  course,"to  precede  his  "coming,"  but  even  that  was 
not  to  appear  till  '•^ after  the  tribulation"  that  was  to  be 
brought  upon  the  Jews.  This  settles  the  controversy  as 
to  whether  or  not  Christ  came  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  it  settles  it  in  the  negative;  and,  therefore, 
I  may  say  Mr.  Manford  "  js  defeated,"  And  he  is  de- 
feated not  by  the  opinion  of  a  few  Doctors,  but  by  the 
word  of  the  Lord. 

I  have  already  given  my  view  of  the  meaning  and 
extent  of  the  "tribulation"  spoken  of.  Luke  calls  it 
the  days  of  vengeance — "  These  be  the  days  of  ven- 
geance, that  all  things  which  are  -vrittcii  may  be  ful- 
filled." Luke  xxi.  22.  As  I  showed  in  a  former  speech, 
the  prophecies  concerning  the  disjDersion  and  punishment 
of  the  Jews  are  noijo  being  fulfilled  before  our  eyes, 
and  the  gentleman  has  not  denied  it.  But  let  us  hear 
Luke's  record  further.  After  describing  the  overthrow 
of  the  city,  which  was  to  them  only  "  the  beginning  of 
sorrows,"  the  Savior  says,  "And  they  shall  fell  by  the 
edge  of  the  sword ;  and  shall  be  led  away  captive  ijtto 
all  ?iations ;  and  Jerusalem  shall  be  trodden  under  foot 
of  the  Gentiles,  imtil  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  be  ful- 
fillcdy  Verse  24.  The  Jews  are  still  dispersed 
"  among  all  nations."  Jerusalem  is  still  "  trodden  under 
foot  of  the  Gentiles."  "The  times  of  the  Gentiles"  are 
not  yet   "  fulfilled."      And,  therefore,   the   coming  of 


yudgment — Punis/ujicnl.  303 

Christ  is  yet  future,  accordiiig  to  the  teaching  of  this 
chapter,  as  it  is  to  occur  '•'■after  the  tribulation  of  those 
days."  "  Then  shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth  mourn, 
and  they  [all  the  tribes  of  the  earth]  shall  see  the  Son 
of  man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and 
great  glory.  And  he  shall  send  his  angels  with  a  great 
sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  they  shall  gather  together  his 
elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  one  end  of  heaveii  to  the 
other."  This  means  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  Let 
us  read,  in  connection  with  this,  i  Thes.  iv.  X5-18: 

"For  this  we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
that  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  unto  the  coming  of 
the  Lord  shall  not  go  before  them  which  are  asleep.  For 
the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven  with  a 
shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel,  and  with  the 
trump  of  God:  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first: 
then  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be  caught  up 
together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in 
the  air:  and  so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord.  Where- 
fore, comfort  one  another  with  these  words." 

But  I  am  reminded  that,  at  verse  thirty-four  of  the 
chapter,  the  Savior  said,  '•''T\\\?,  generation  shall  not  pass 
till  all  these  things  be  fulfilled."  As  I  said  before,  the 
word  genea^  here  I'endered  "  generation,"  means  race. 
I  did  not  say  it  always  means  race.  Had  the  gentleman 
observed  this  it  would  have  saved  him  the  time  and 
trouble  of  reading  passages  wherein  it  does  not  have 
this  meaning.  The  question  Is,  Does  the  word  ever 
mean  race  ?  It  cannot  be  denied  that  it  sometimes  does. 
All  Greek  lexicons  known  to  me  give  it  this  meaning. 
Indeed,  if  we  may  rely  upon  the  best  Greek  lexicons, 
"birth,"  "descent,"  "race,"  "  blood,"  seems  to  be  the 
primary  meaning  of  the  word;  while  "  lifetime,"  or  "  the 
people  living  at  any  one  time,"  is  a  secondary  meaning. 


304  Oral  Disctission. 

Still,  I  freely  grant  that  it  is  often  used  in  the  latter 
sense.  In  the  New  Testament  it  is  generally  translated 
'■'■  general io?t" — once  nation — that  is,  in  the  common 
version  of  the  Bible.  Dr.  Campbell  and  Martin  Luther, 
however,  both  translated  the  word  race,  as  I  do  in  this 
passage.  But  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  English  word 
generation  ?  Turn  to  your  English  dictionary,  and  you 
will  find  the  definition  of  this  word  is  favorable  to  my 
position. 

The  gentleman  tells  us  that,  "Jesus  told  the  disciples 
they  should  live  to  see  him  come"  I  hardly  think  my 
friend  himself  was  satisfied  with  his  effort  on  this  point. 
In  the  same  way  that  he  proved  that  the  disciples  who 
were  then  with  Jesus  lived  to  see  him  come,  I  can  prove 
that  Paul  lived  till  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  hence 
that  the  resurrection  is  past.  That  apostle  says,  i  Thes. 
iv.  16,  17:  "For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from 
heaven  with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel,  and 
with  the  trump  of  God :  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise 
first :  then  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be  caught 
up  together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in 
the  air:  and  so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord."  "  IVe" 
in  this  passage,  it  may  be  argued,  includes  at  least  Paul 
himself  and  some  of  the  Thessalonians,  and  they  were 
to  be  "  alive  and  remain  "  unto  the  resurrection !  But, 
now,  I  am  reminded  that  Mr.  Manford  says  this  is  a 
figurative  passage,  and  that  the  resurrection  here  spoken 
of  did  take  place  in  the  lifetime  of  some  who  lived  when 
this  letter  was  written.  So  I  shall  have  to  try  him  on  a 
passage  that  he  admits  refers  yet  to  the  future,  i  Cor. 
XV.  51,  53:  "Behold,  I  show  you  a  mystery;  We  shall 
not  all  sleep,  but  we  shall  all  be  changed,  in  a  moment, 
in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  at  the  last  trump :  for  the 


Judgment — Punishment.  305 

trumpet  shall  sound,  and  the  dead  shall  be  raised  incor- 
ruptible, and  we  shall  be  changed."  According  to  this 
reading,  then,  and  the  gentleman's  hypercriticism,  the 
immortal  resurrection  took  place  while  Paul  was  yet 
alive!  The  resurrection  is  past!!  We  shall  have  to  put 
my  friend  down  with  "  Hymeneus  and  Philetus,  who 
concerning  the  truth  erred,  saying  the  resurrection  is 
past  already;  and  overthrow  the  fiiith  of  some."  3  Tim. 
ii.  17,  18.  If  Universalism  be  true,  is  there  anything  in 
the  future.?  anything,  I  mean,  of  which  the  Bible 
treats  }  What  use  have  we  for  the  Bible,  since  Jerusalem 
was  destroyed  } 

Here,  then,  I  dismiss  the  twenty-fourth  of  Matthew, 
as  a  witness  in  this  case,  feeling  that,  though  it  was  called 
in  by  my  opponent,  its  testimony  is  overwhelmingly 
against  him.  All  the  mistakes  of  Dr.  Clarke,  and  other 
like  critics,  cannot  break  its  force. 

All  the  gentleman  had  to  say  about  the  "last  days" 
and  "  last  time  "  disappears  in  the  light  of  the  fact  that 
these  phrases  sometimes  mean  the  last  days  of  the  Jewish 
dispensation;  sometimes  the  whole  Christian  dispensa- 
tion ;  and  sometimes  the  last  days  of  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation. A  little  common  sense  exercised  in  consider- 
ing the  connection  in  which  the  phrase  occurs,  will  carry 
the  reader  through  all  the  smoke  that  can  be  raised. 

Now,  a  few  words  about  the  judgment.  The  gentle- 
man thinks  he  has  proved  that  Christ  is  to  "judge  in  the 
earth."  That,  however,  does  not  touch  the  question  at 
all.  I  raise  no  question  as  to  where  Christ  will  judge 
the  world.  The  question  is  one  of  time.  When  will 
he  do  it.?  That's  the  question.  All  those  tremendous 
hurricanes  of  emphasis  with  which  my  friend  came 
down  upon  the  phrase  "  in  the  earth,"  were  lost. 
26 


3o6  Oral  Discussion. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind,  also,  in  the  investigation 
of  this  subject,  that  the  word  judgment  is  not  always 
used  in  the  same  sense,  either  in  the  Bible  or  elsewhere. 
It  sometimes  means,  "  Wisdom  and  prudence,  enabling 
a  person  to  discern  right  and  wrong,  good  and  evil." 
For  judgment,  in  this  sense.,  Christ  came  into  the  world 
the  first  time;  and  for  judgment,  in  this  sense,  the  Gos- 
pel is  now  preached  to  the  nations.  But  this  is  not  the 
sense  in  which  the  word  is  used  in  our  conti'oversy.  As 
illustrative  of  the  distinction  I  here  make,  I  will  read  two 
passages  of  scripture — both  words  of  the  Savior.  John 
ix.  39:  "And  Jesus  said.  For  judgment  I  am  come  into 
this  world ;  that  they  which  see  not  might  see,  and  that 
they  which  see,  might  be  made  blind."  John  xii.  47 : 
"  And  if  any  man  hear  my  words,  and  believe  not,  I 
judge  him  not :  for  I  came  not  to  judge  the  world,  but 
to  save  the  world."  Now,  I  submit,  that,  if  judgment 
is  used  in  the  same  sense  in  both  these  passages,  then 
they  ai"e  contradictory  statements — palpably  so.  But 
the  context  shows  that  the  word  is  not  used  in  the  same 
sense  in  both  passages.  In  the  first,  Jesus  says,  "  For 
judgment  I  am  come  into  this  world,  that  they  ivhlch 
see  not  might  see."  That  is,  he  came  to  "  set  judgment 
in  the  earth,"  as  my  friend  read — came  to  impart  judg- 
ment— "  wisdom  to  discern  right  and  wrong " — to  the 
Gentiles.  To  this  agree  the  words  of  the  prophet  as 
quoted  by  my  friend,  and  as  quoted  by  the  Savior, 
Matt.  xii.  18:  "Behold  my  servant  whom  I  have  chosen; 
my  beloved,  in  whom  my  soul  is  well  pleased :  I  will 
put  my  Spirit  upon  him,  and  he  shall  shozv  judgment  to 
the  Gentiles."  But,  in  the  other  passage,  the  Savior 
evidently  uses  the  word  judge  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is 
used  in  my  proposition,  and,  hence,  in  our  discussion. 


Judgment — Punishment.  307 

And,  then  he  says,  "  If  any  man  hear  my  words,  and 
believe  not,  I  [now]  judge  him  not;  for  1  came  not  to 
judge  the  world  [in  the  sense  of  condemning],  but  to 
save  the  world.  He  that  rejecteth  me,  and  rcceiveth  not 
my  words,  hath  one  that  judgeth  him:  the  word  that  I 
have  spoken,  the  same  SHALL  judge  him  AT  THE 
LAST  DAY."  "  For  he  hath  appointed  a  day  in 
which  he  w/// judge  the  world  in  righteousness."  And 
this  is  the  day  of  which  Paul  spoke  when  he  had 
finished  his  course,  and  which  he  then  put  beyond  death. 
"  There  is  laid  up  for  me  [who  '  am  now  ready  to  be 
offered']  a  crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the 
righteous  JUDGE,  5^a// give  me  AT  THAT  DAY." 
"  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die^  but  after  this 
the  judgment."  And  this  brings  me  to  Hebrews  ix.  27, 
again.  The  gentleman  will  have  it  that  "  they,"  in  the 
next  chapter,  refers  back  to  "  men  "  in  the  controverted 
passage,  as  its  antecedent.  This  I  denied — yes,  "  squarely 
denied."  That's  the  way  I  deny  things,  when  I  do  at 
all.  But  he  thinks  my  denial  "  will  not  set  aside  the 
rules  of  grammar."  Where  are  the  rules  of  grammar.? 
I  have  not  heard  from  them  yet.  What  do  they  say  on 
the  point?  Just  here  it  would  be  eminently  proper  to 
bring  in  some  Doctor!  Where,  now,  is  "Dr.  Clarke".? 
If  the  Doctors  are  all  absent,  or  refuse  to  answer  the 
call,  then  let  us  have  "  the  rules  of  grammar."  Let  it  be 
proved  that  "  they,"  in  the  tenth  chapter  of  Hebrews,  is 
relativ^e  to  "  men "  in  the  ninth.  Proof.,  now,  is  what 
we  want;  and  not  swaggering  talk.  The  latter  can  be 
entirely  dispensed  with. 

The  gentleman  will  have  it,  without  one  word  of 
scripture,  that  Moses  died  typically,  and  after  him  the 
priests.     Well,  if  Moses'  death,  and  that  of  the  priests 


308  Oral  Discussion. 

was  typical  of  Christ's  death,  of  what  was  the  lamb's 
death  typical?  But  why  spend  time  on  a  matter  so 
plain?  Is  there  anybody  here  (Mr.  Manford  excepted) 
that  rca//y  believes  that  when  Paul  said,  "as  it  is  ap- 
pointed unto  men  once  to  die,"  he  meant  the  Jewish 
high  priests,  and  had  reference  to  their  shedding  the 
blood  of  animals  under  the  law  ?  Why,  if  such  was  his 
meaning,  did  he  not  say  that  ?  He  could  have  said  that 
just  as  easily  as  what  he  did  say.  He  knew  how  to 
designate  the  high  priests,  and  how  to  speak  of  their 
taking  the  blood  of  animals.  But  instead  of  using  a 
word  that  meant  high  priests,  he  used  a  word  that  he 
knew  7neant  mankind.  Would  any  of  our  hearers  ever 
have  understood  the  passage  as  Mr.  Manford  does  with- 
out his  help  in  the  case? 

The  gentleman  had  a  good  deal  to  say  about  Adam, 
and  the  serpent,  and  death,  and  the  "  Scheme  of  Redemp- 
tion^'' to  which  I  paid  but  little  attention,  as  it  was 
entirely  out  of  the  range  of  this  discussion.  But  he 
wound  up  that  little  episode  with  a  scowl,  and  an  ex- 
clamation, that  "error,  to  be  hated,  needs  but  to  be 
seen"!  Then  thought  I,  "Truth,  to  be  hated  by  vicious 
men,  needs  only  to  be  restrictive  of  vice." 

The  gentleman  seems  to  have  a  good  deal  of  trouble 
over  a  matter  not  at  all  under  his  control,  and  about 
which  he  evidently  knows  but  little — a  matter  altogether 
under  the  control  of  one  fully  competent  to  attend  to  it. 
He  is  afraid  somebody  will  be  "  in  prison, "  "  reserved 
unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished,"  who,  at  the 
gi'eat  day,  ^vill  turn  out  to  be  innocent!  That  would  be 
a  terrible  affair!  It  would  punish  my  friend's  believing 
and  pious  soul  almost  eternally !  I  have  no  trouble  about 
that  matter  myself,  however,  for  I  believe  "  The   Lord 


yudgment — Punishtnent,  309 

KNOWETH  HOW  to  deliver  the  godly  out  of  temp- 
tation, and  to  reserve  the  unjust  unto  the  day  of  judg- 
ment to  be  punished."  3  Peter  ii.  9.  But,  as  my  friend 
does  not  believe  this,  he  is  somewhat  fearful  that  the  day 
of  judgment  will  reveal  the  fact  that  great  injustice  has 
been  done  to  parties. 

The  gentleman  manifests  the  most  intense  eagerness 
to  get  into  my  "  hells."  When  he  laughs  over  hell,  I 
intend  that  it  shall  be  seen  that  he  laughs  at  the  word 
of  God.     This  debate,  moreover,  is  not  about  "  hells." 

I  will  now  give  attention  to  a  few  objections  that  have 
been  thrown  in  my  way. 

I.  My  opponent  objects  to  what  I  have  shown  to  be 
the  scripture  teaching,  as  to  the  judgment  of  the  world, 
because  it  is,  as  he  seems  to  think,  of  "  heathen  origin." 
But  he  failed  to  show  anything  as  to  its  origin  after  all. 
He  read  from  RoUin's  Ancient  History,  to  show  that 
Zoroaster,  and  after  him  the  Greeks,  believed  in  a  judg- 
ment after  death ;  and  what  if  they  did  ?  The  fact  that 
they  believed  it,  does  not  prove  that  the  doctrine  origin- 
ated with  them  by  any  means.  The  gentleman  should 
have  a  higher  regard  for  his  reputation  as  a  logician  than 
to  make  such  loose  statements.  But  what  if  Zoroaster, 
and  all  the  Greeks,  did  believe  in  a  judgment  after 
death  ?  Does  that  fact  prove  that  there  certainly  will  be 
none?  I  am  glad  the  gentleman  has  opposed  this  objec- 
tion to  my  proposition;  I  think  I  can  make  it  serve  the- 
cause  of  truth.  He  believes  that  Zoroaster  and  the 
Greeks  taught  a  "judgment  after  death."  Mark  that. 
Now  I  demand  the  proof.  I  want  it  in  as  strong  language 
as  Jesus  and  the  apostles  used  upon  the  subject.  ^That's 
all  I  ask.  Can  he  produce  it }  I  do  not  believe  he  can. 
Let  him,  now,  bring  farward  a  passage  from  Zoroaster, 


3IO  Oral  Discussion. 

or  any  other  Persian,  or  any  Pagan  Greek,  that  does, 
beyond  question^  teach  a  judgment  after  death;  and  I 
promise  to  produce  as  strong  a  one  from  Jesus  or  one  of 
his  apostles,  teaching  the  same,  "  But,"  he  \vill  say, 
"  the  hinguage  of  Jesus  and  tlie  apostles  is  figurative." 
Exactly !  But  why  did  it  never  occur  to  him  that  the 
language  of  the  Persians  and  Greeks  is  figurative,  too? 
Can  it  be  because  he  has  had  no  evasive  purpose  to 
sen^e  by  such  a  conception  ?  I  say,  that  if  it  cannot  be 
shown  that  Jesus  and  the  apostles  taught  a  judgment 
after  death,  then  it  cannot  be  shown  that  anybody  ^\ ox  did. 
3.  It  is  -objected  that  such  a  judgment  as  I  am  con- 
tending for  would  be  "  entirely  unnecessary."  My  friend 
can  see  no  reason  why  there  should  be  such  a  judgment 
unices  it  should  be  merely  for  the  purpose  of  "  making  a 
grand  display."  This  is,  to  use  the  very  mildest  lan- 
guage, a  very  presumptuous  objection.  Must  we  have 
a  reason  for  everything  God  does  in  the  government  of 
this  universe.?!  Let  us  try  to  think  for  a  moment  of  the 
magnitude  of  this  boundless  something  we  call  the 
universe.  Of  course,  we  shall  be  perfectly  bewildered 
with  the  ineffable  immensity  of  the  thought.  Imagina- 
tion's utmost  reach  is  a  thing  of  nothing.  The  most 
robust  reason  reels  to  and  fro  like  a  drunken  mati 
under  the  thought  of  even  a  few  millions  of  worlds, 
spinning  like  so  many  tops,  in  space,  and  yet  in  such 
perfect  order.  And  yet  so  many  worlds,  turning  in 
pei"petual  and  blazing  splendor  about  us,  are,  to  the 
universe,  no  more  than  one  drop  of  water  is  to  the 
mighty  ocean.  But  our  reason  will  hardly  allow  us  to 
doubt  that  all  worlds,  and  systems  of  worlds,  and  sys- 
tems of  systems  of  worlds,  are  peopled  by  intelligences; 
and  certainly  all  under  the  government  of  the  Almighty 


Judgment — Punishment.  31 1 

God.  Could  my  opponent  govern  the  universe?!  He 
blushes  at  the  suggestion ;  and  becoming  modesty  says 
such  a  blush  is  in  order.  Could  he  govern  two  millions 
of  God's  worlds .''  Could  he  govern  one  hundred  }  Even 
one .''  Half  of  one  }  Could  he  govern  the  United  States  "i 
Or,  one  of  them?  Could  he  govei'n  this  little  city? 
Can  he  govern  himself?  Can  he  govern  his  tongue? 
And  shall  mortal  man,  who,  when  compared  with  the 
universe,  seems  but  a  poor  little  wiggling  worm  of  the 
dust;  who,  according  to  my  friend,  may  almost  as  well 
abandon  the  attempt  to  govern  himself  till  his  "  appetites 
and  passions"  are  dead  and  buried;  who  stands  to  God's 
universe  almost  as  nothing;  shall  he  dictate  to  Almighty 
God  a  moral  philosophy  for  the  government  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  demand  of  him  a  reason  for  everything  he 
does?!  For  my  part,  I  can  think  of  nothing  more  su- 
premely ridiculous.  And,  indeed,  it  would  be  a  less  mat- 
ter than  it  is,  if  it  were  only  ridiculous.  It  is  worse.  By 
the  way,  I  may  as  well  say,  before  dismissing  this  very  for- 
midable objection,  that  I  have  never  supposed  that  God 
has  appointed  a  day  in  the  which  to  judge  the  world,  for 
the  purpose  of  ascertaining  w^ho  are  guilty  and  who  are 
not.  The  sentencing  of  the  finally  impenitent  to  "  ever- 
lasting punishment,"  accompanied  by  the  announcement 
of  the  reason  therefor,  may  serve  a  good  purpose  in  the 
universe,  although  my  friend  may  not  now  be  able  to  see 
it.  I  see  many  things  in  the  Bible,  as  well  as  in  nature, 
the  "  reason  "  of  which  lies  a  little  too  deep  for  me.  If 
"  the  day  of  judgment"  is  the  only  reality  my  opponent 
has  ever  come  across,  the  reason  of  which  he  could  not  see, 
he  has  either  gone  blind  through  the  world,  or  has  been 
infinitely  more  far-seeing  than  most  of  his  fellow  crea- 
tures. 


312  Oral  Discussion. 

Having  shown,  as  I  think,  pretty  clearly,  that  the 
coming  of  Christ  "in  his  glory,  and  with  his  angels," 
to  raise  the  dead  and  judge  the  world,  is  future;  and 
that  consequently  the  judgment  of  the  world  is  to  be 
after  death,  and,  therefore,  future ;  and  that  the  wicked 
will  be  punished  after  death ;  I  am  now  ready  to  advance 
to  the  fourth  and  last  point  in  my  affirmation. 

IV.  The  punishment  of  the  wicked  will  be  endless. 
"These  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment;  but 
the  righteous  into  life  eternal."  Matt.  xxv.  46.  "  Who 
shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction  from  the 
presence  of  the  Lord  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power." 
2  Thes.  i.  9.  The  former  of  these  passages  is  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Savior;  the  latter  that  of  Paul.  It  will 
not  be  denied  that  the  word  here  rendered  "everlasting" 
is  used  as  descriptive  of  the  duration  of  the  punishment 
of  the  wicked.  Neither  will  it  be  denied,  I  presume  to 
say,  that  it  is  the  word  from  which  the  word  "eternal" 
is  generally  translated.  Now,  upon  these  passages  I 
have  to  submit  as  follows : 

I.  The  woi'd  here  rendered  everlasting  does  express 
endless  duration.  I  do  not  say  it  always  does.  I  freely 
admit  that  there  are  many  instances  of  its  occurrence  in 
which  it  does  not  express  so  much.  This  admission  I 
make,  because  it  is  just,  and  to  save  time  and  unnecessary 
talk.  The  word  "endless"  occurs,  I  believe,  only 
twice  in  the  New  Testament,  and  comes  from  two  dif- 
ferent Greek  words.  In  one  instance  it  does  not  mean 
literally  eternal,  or  endless.  In  the  other  it  may.  So 
that  if  the  word  endless  were  used  as  descriptive  of  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  it  would  make  my  case  no 
stronger.  I  have  no  doubt  but  that,  were  that  word 
used  in  the  passages  I  have  quoted  instead  of  the  one 


yudgment — Punishment.  313 

that  Is  used,  and  the  one  that  is,  never  so  used,  Univer- 
saHsts  would  make  just  as  much  capital  of  tlie  fact  as 
tliey  now  make  of  tlie  fact  that  everlasting  is  so  used 
and  endless  never.  I  am  certain  they  could  do  it.  The 
one  word  is  just  as  strong  as  the  other.  Indeed  they  are 
used  as  equivalents  by  Paul.  In  Heb.  vii.  16,  17,  he 
says  that  Christ  is  made  a  priest  "  after  the  power  of  an 
endless  life,"  and  his  proof  of  the  fact  is,  that  it  is  writ- 
ten of  him,  "Thou  art  a  priest  ybrct;ejr;"  and  "forever" 
is  from  the  word  rendered  "eternal,"  and  "everlasting." 
If,  therefore,  the  word  rendered  "  everlasting "  is  not 
competent  to  express  endless  duration,  there  is  no  Greek 
word  that  is. 

2.  The  word  rendered  "  everlasting,"  In  the  passages 
cited,  always  covers  the  whole  of  the  period  to  which  it 
is  applied.  In  these  passages  it  is  applied  to  the  state 
into  which  men  go  after  death.  Now  you  may  see 
clearly,  if  you  have  not  seen  before,  why  I  have  been  at 
such  pains  to  show,  that  the  judgment  from  which  the 
wicked  ai'e  to  "  go  away  Into  everlasting  punishment" 
is  after  death.  Here,  I  have  "everlasting"  applied  to 
the  after-death  period  of  man's  existence.  Paul  says, 
"The  things  which  are  seen  are  temporal;  but  the 
things  which  are  not  seen  are  eternal."  2  Cor.  Iv.  18. 
"  The  things  that  are  seen "  are  things  of  this  short  life ; 
but  "  the  things  that  are  not  seen,"  are  things  of  the 
future  state.  The  punishment  of  the  wicked  in  the 
future  state  is  to  be  eternal. 

3.  In  the  former  of  the  two  passages  with  which  I 
started  out  we  have  an  antithesis.  The  punishment  of 
the  wicked  is  described  by  the  same  word  of  duration 
that  describes  the  future  life  of  the  righteous.  After 
death,  and  from  the  judgment,   the  wicked  "  shall  go 

27 


3H 


Oral  Discussion. 


away  into  everlasting  punishment;  but  the  righteous 
into  life  eternal."  "Eternal"  is  from  the  same  word 
rendered  "everlasting."  My  friend  knows  the  nature 
of  the  antithesis.  Its  arms  arc  equal.  When,  therefore, 
the  life  into  which  the  righteous  shall  go,  after  deaths 
shall  end,  then,  and  not  till  then,  will  the  punishment 
into  which  the  wicked  shall  go,  after  death,  end.  If  the 
one  is  endless,  the  other  is ;  if  the  one  is  not,  the  other 
is  not. 

4.  The  sentence  will  be  pronounced  upon  both  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked  at  the  same  time — and  after 
death,  as  we  have  seen.  They  will  enter  their  respective 
future  destinies  at  the  same  time.  The  duration  of  those 
destinies  is  described  by  the  same  word.  A  iid  this  is  to 
take  -place  at  the  end  of  the  Christian  dispensation.  In 
proof  of  this  statement  I  call  up  a  passage  about  which 
we  have  already  had  much  to  say  in  this  discussion. 
1  Cor.  XV.  22-25.  "As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in 
Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive  *  *  *  at  his  co?ning. 
[vv-ith  this  coming  to  raise  the  dead  I  have  connected  the 
judgment.]  Then  cometh  the  e7id,  when  he  shall  have 
delivered  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father; 
when  he  shall  have  put  down  all  rule,  and  all  authority 
and  power.  For  he  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all 
enemies  under  his  feet."  We  have  seen  how  the  "  ene- 
mies of  the  cross  of  Christ"  are  to  be  put  under  his  feet 
— "These  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment." 
"  The  enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ,  whose  end  is  de- 
struction," (Philip,  iii.  18,  19,)  are  to  "  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Loi-d, 
and  from  the  glory  of  his  pov^'-er,  when  he  shall  come  to 
be  glorified  in  his  saints."  2  Thes.  i.  9,  10.  And 
"  THEN  COMETH  THE  END."     The  Gospel  will 


Judgment — Punishment.  315 

never  more  be  preached.  Christ  will  no  longer  be 
"  mediator  between  God  and  men."  God  will  then  say 
what  he  never  yet  has  said :  "  He  that  is  filthy,  let  him 
he  filthy  still"  I  know  this  is  a  fearful  thought !  And 
yet  we  ought  to  consider  well  the  question,  "  What 
shall  the  end  be  of  them  that  obey  not  the  Gospel  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.?"     \Time  expired. 


[mr.  manford's  fourth  replv.] 

It  seems  that  my  worthy  friend  entertains  to-day 
supreme  contempt  for  the  judgment  of  learned  and  intel- 
lectual men — for  that  of  A.  Campbell,  Drs.  Barnes, 
Doddridge,  Macknight,  Whitby,  Hammond,  Lightfoot, 
Clarke,  and  others,  all  fellow  believers  with  him  in  endless 
punishment.  It  almost  throws  him  into  spasms  for  me 
to  name  one  of  them.  The  reason  is  obvious.  They 
are  all  against  his  crude  notions,  and  favor  the  interpre- 
tations I  give  of  certain  passages.  If  they  sustained 
him  he  would  not  be  so  disgusted.  In  his  discussion 
with  Mr.  Logan,  before  referred  to,  he  was  deeply  in 
love  v.'ith  tlie  "doctors"  he  now  despises.  In  his  first 
speech  in  that  discussion,  he  refers  to,  or  reads  from, 
sixty  "doctors,"  and  that  is  only  the  beginning  of  his 
quotations  from  "doctors."  Adam  Clarke  was  then  as 
sound  as  a  nut,  but  now  he  is  of  no  account  whatever. 
He  has  to-day  made  the  discovery,  that  the  "  Methodists 
repudiate  "  him,  which  every  intelligent  Methodist  knows 
is  not  so.  The  truth  is,  in  that  discussion  on  water 
baptism,  he  thought  those  "  doctors"  favored  his  views  on 
certain  points,  and  so  they  were  all  then  grand,  good, 
glorious,  and  mighty  men.     But  he  finds  them  to  be 


316  Oral   Discussion. 

against  him  in  this  discussion,  and  so  they  are  good  for 
nothing.  But  he  adds,  "  All  these  doctors  are  with  me 
in  the /rci^(95//^'(?;«  we  are  discussing."  That  is  so;  and 
that  is  what  makes  their  testimony  against  him  so  valu- 
able. His  own  household  testifies  against  his  wild 
speculations,  and  that  is  the  cause  of  his  disgust  when  I 
make  this  manifest. 

Our  friend  will  have  it,  that  Christ's  coming  "  in 
power  and  glory,"  and  "  in  his  kingdom,"  are  two  dif- 
ferent events,  thousands,  and  perhaps,  millions  of  ages 
apart.  And  to  make  out  his  case,  we  have  seen  how  he 
attempted  to  rend  asunder  Matt,  xvi.,  contrary  to  the 
judgment  of  the  learned  world.  But  he  should  remem- 
ber that  what  "  God  has  joined  let  not  man  put  asun- 
der." He  has  attempted  to  violate  this  command  to 
save  his  cause.  A  man  ought  to  think,  at  least,  twice, 
before  he  attempts  such  an  unholy  work.  For  further 
evidence  he  is  wrong,  I  refer  you  to  Luke  xxi.  37-32 : 
"  And  then  shall  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  a 
cloud,  with  power  and  great  glory.  And  when  these 
things  begin  to  come  to  pass,  then  look  up,  and  lift  up 
your  heads :  for  your  redemption  draweth  nigh.  And 
he  spake  to  them  a  pai"able :  Behold  the  fig-tree,  and  all 
the  trees ;  when  they  now  shoot  forth,  ye  see  and  know 
of  your  own  selves  that  summer  is  now  nigh  at  hand. 
So  likewise  ye,  when  ye  see  these  things  come  to  pass, 
know  ye  that  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  IS  NIGH 
AT  HAND.  Verily,  I  say  unto  you.  This  generation 
shall  not  pass  away,  till  all  be  fulfilled."  Here,  as  in 
Matt,  xvi.,  the  coming  of  the  "  kingdom  of  God,"  and 
the  coming  of  Christ  "in  power  and  glory,"  are  the 
same.  He  admitted  that  the  kingdom  had  come;  then 
the  coming  "in   power   and   glory"  has   taken   place. 


Judgment — Punishment.  317 

Whea  Christ  said,  "  The  kingdom  of  God  is  nigh  at 
hand,"  he  only  rei>eated,  in  other  words,  what  he  said  in 
the  other  verse,  "Tlien  shall  they  see  the  Son  of  man 
coming  in  a  cloud,  with  power  and  great  glory."  Both 
verses  refer  to  one  event.  In  Matt,  xxiv.,  that  kingdom 
and  coming  are  identical,  as  here :  "  And  they  shall  see 
the  Son  of  man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  with 
power  and  great  glory.  *  *  Now  leaiui  a  parable  of 
the  fig-tree;  when  his  branch  is  yet  tender,  and  putteth 
forth  leaves,  ye  know  that  summer  is  nigh :  so  likewise 
ye,  when  ye  shall  see  all  these  things,  know  that  IT  is 
near,  even  at  the  door."  Now,  it  here  means  the  same 
as  kingdom  in  Luke,  just  read.  Barnes  understands  it 
so.  According  to  Matt,  xxiv.,  then,  the  coming  "in 
power  and  glory"  and  the  coming  of  "the  kingdom" 
are  the  same.  Now  turn  to  Mark  xiii.  26,  39 :  "  And 
then  shall  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  the  clouds 
with  great  power  and  glory.  So  ye  in  like  manner, 
when  ye  shall  see  these  things  come  to  pass,  know  that 
it  is  nigh,  even  at  the  doors,"  Here,  again,  you  find, 
that  the  coming  "  in  power  and  glory,"  and  the  coming 
of  "  the  kingdom  "  are  the  same,  for  the  word  it  here 
means  the  kingdom  spoken  of  in  Luke  xxi.  Here,  then, 
in  four  places  (Matt.  xvi.  and  xxiv.,  Mark  xiii.,  Luke 
xxi),  the  coming  "in  power  and  glory"  is  the  same  as 
the  coming  of  the  kingdom.  Will  he  lay  unholy  hands 
on  all  those  words  of  Jesus,  and  attempt  to  tear  them 
all  asunder  to  save  a  fallen  case.''  We  shall  see.  It 
seems  to  me,  that  this  foicrfold  testimony,  and  all  from 
Christ  himself,  must  convince  all  candid  persons,  that 
the  coming  "  in  power  and  glory"  has  taken  place.  The 
gentleman  admits,  that  the  kingdom  of  Christ  has  come, 
and  that  he  came  in  that  kingdom ;  and  we  have  seen 
that  coming  was  "  in  power  and  glory." 


3i8  Oral  Discussion. 

He  told  us,  that  the  coming  in  the  flesh,  and  in  the 
kingdom,  were  "  not  in  the  glory  of  the  Father."  Then 
Christ  was  mistaken.  Said  he,  "  Now  is  the  Son  of  man 
glorified^  and  God  is  glorified  in  him.  If  God  be  glori- 
fied in  him,  God  also  shall  glorify  him  in  himself,  and 
straightway  glorify  him.  John  xiii.  31,  33.  Christ's 
nature,  character,  life,  death,  resurrection,  and  kingdom, 
were  all  glorious.  It  was  his  Father  that  made  them 
glorious.  He  was  born;  he  lived,  labored,  died,  arose, 
and  ascended,  in  the  "glory  of  his  Father."  His  king- 
dom is  a  glorious  kingdom,  his  reign  is  a  glorious  reign, 
and  its  consummation  will  be  glorious.  It  seems  that  the 
gentleman  is  willing  to  divest  Jesus  of  all  glory  to  make 
out  his  case,  as  well  as  rend  his  words  asunder. 

But  their  would  not  be  much  glory  in  the  coming  my 
friend  talks  about.  He  supposes  it  will  be  a  coming  to 
blot  God's  universe  out  of  existence ;  a  coming  to  transfer 
countless  millions  of  God's  creation  from  one  hell  to  another 
hell;  a  coming  to  divide  parents  and  children,  husbands 
and  wives,  brothers  and  sisters,  friends  and  neighbors, 
sendlno-  some  to  heaven,  and  others  to  eternal  torture;  a 
comino^  to  make  a  compromise  with  the  devil — giving 
him  two-thirds  of  mankind;  a  coming  to  perpetuate  sin, 
wrono-,  misery,  death,  and  destruction  eternally.  That 
is  the  kind  of  a  coming  in  glory  he  advocates.  A 
hymn  book  thus  sings  of  that  "glorious"  coming: 

Behold,  that  great  and  awful  day 

Of  PARTING  soon  will  come, 
When  sinners  must  be  hurled  away, 

And  Christians  gathered  home. 

Perhaps  the  parent  sees  the  child 

Sink  down  to  endless  flames! 
With  shrieks,  and  howls,  and  bitter  cries. 

Never  to  rise  again. 


judgment — Punishment.  319 

•'  O,  father,  see  my  blazing  hand  ! 
Mofher,  behold  your  child  ! 
Against  you  now  a  witness  stands, 
Amidst  the  flames  confined." 

The  child  perhaps  the  parents  view 

Go  HEADLONG  DOWN  TO   HELL, 

Gone  with  the  rest  of  Satan's  crew, 
And  bid  the  child  farewell. 

The  husband  sees  his  piteous  wife. 
With  whom  he  once  did  dwell. 
Depart  with  groans  and  bitter  cries, 
"My  husband,  fare  you  well." 

But,  O,  perhaps  the  wife  may  see 

The  man  she  once  did  love 
Sink  down  to  endless  misery. 

While  she  is  crowned  above ! 

That  is  what  the  gentleman's  glorious  coming  means. 
But  all  of  Christ's  comings  are  glorious,  hence  he 
will  not  come  for  such  a  horrid  purpose.  He  came  in 
the  flesh  to  save  the  world ;  he  came  in  his  kingdom  to 
save  the  world;  and  he  will  come  at  the  end  of  his 
reign  to  present  the  world  saved  to  God,  not  to  damn 
nearly  all  of  it. 

According  to  my  friend's  own  admission,  the  "  coming 
in  glory"  has  taken  place.  He  said,  that  the  words, 
"For  then  shall  be  great  tribulatiox,"  (Matt.  xxiv. 
21,)  were  fulfilled  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  All 
spoken  of  from  the  15  th  to  the  23nd  verse  relates  to 
those  times,  he  admitted.  Bear  that  in  mind  while  I 
read  the  29th  and  30th  verses.  "IMMEDIATELY 
after  the  tribulation  of  those  days,  shall  the  sun  be 
darkened :  *  *  and  THEN  shall  appear  the  sign  of 
the  Son  of  man  in  heaven ;    *    *    and  they  shall  see  the 


320  Oral  Discussion. 

Son  of  man  coming  with  power  and  great  glory." 
You  see  how  conclusive  this  is.  The  "  tribulation " 
came  on  the  world  in  the  apostolic  age.  This  he  admit- 
ted. Well,  Jesus  said,  "IMMEDIATELY  AFTER 
the  tribulation  of  those  days"  "the  Son  of  man  shall 
come."  The  only  resort  the  gentleman  has  now,  is  to 
go  to  that  old  dictionary  of  his,  and  show  that  "immedi- 
ately "  does  not  mean  "  immediately,"  but  several  thousand 
years. 

He  admitted  that  Christ  told  the  disciples  that  they 
would  see  him  come  in  power  and  glory,  but  by  ye  and 
you^  when  he  talked  to  them,  he  did  not  mean  those  he 
was  talking  to,  but  those  who  may  be  living  on  the 
earth  thousands  of  years  hence!  Then,  when  Jesus 
said,  (Matt.  xxiv.  2,  4,)  "See  ye  not  all  these  things.^ 
verily,  I  say  xxxiio  yoii^  There  shall  not  be  left  here  one 
stone  upon  another,  that  shall  not  be  thrown  down," 
and  when  he  further  said  to  the  disciples,  "  Take  heed 
that  no  man  deceive  you" — by  ye  and  you  he  did 
not  mean  the  disciples  but  somebody  else.  When 
he  said,  "Verily  I  say  unto  you^  that  one  oi you  shall 
betray  me,"  (Matt.  xxvi.  31,)  he  did  not  mean  those  he 
was  addressing  at  all!  When  he  said,  " Drink _y(?  all  of 
it,"  (Matt.  xxvi.  27,)  he  not  mean  that  the  disciples 
should  drink  a  drop  of  it!  When  he  said,  "Go_y<7  and 
teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them,"  he  did  not  mean 
that  the  disciples  should  teach  or  baptize  a  soul !  And 
then,  to  sustain  such  an  outrageous  perversion,  he  quoted 
Paul,  "  We  shall  not  all  sleep."  The  word  we  is  not 
you  or  ye.  Webster  says,  "  VVe  is  used  to  express  men 
in  general,"  and  so  Paul  used  it  correctly.  But  you 
and  ye  only  mean  those  addressed. 

He  ran  to  Webster  to  bolster  up  his  notion  about  gen' 


Judgment —  Punishment.  321 

eration.  I  will  give  his  definition ;  as  you  will  see,  he 
refutes  my  friend.  "A  single  succession  in  natural 
descent,  as  the  children  of  the  same  parents;  hence,  an 
age.  Thus  we  say,  the  third,  fourth  or  tenth  generation. 
Gen.  XV.  16.  The  people  of  the  same  period,  or  living 
at  the  same  time.  'O  faithless  and  perverse  generation? 
Luke  ix."  Down  further,  he  gives  race  as  the  poetical 
meaning,  and  gives  the  poet  Shakspeare  for  authority. 
As  my  friend  don't  like  Clarke,  I  will  give  Benson's 
note  on  the  words  "this  generation"  in  Matt,  xxiv., 
and  he  was  also  a  Methodist  commentator : 

'"This  generation,'  etc.,  thereby  evidently  showing 
that  Christ  had  been  speaking  all  this  while  OxNly  of 
the  calamities  coming  on  the  Jews,  and  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem." 

Our  consistent  friend  told  us,  that  Christ  did  not  come 
ia  those  days,  because  he  told  his  disciples,  "  If  any  man 
say  unto  you,  Lo  here  is  Christ,  believe  it  not,  for  there 
shall  be  false  christs."  He  inferred  that  if  Christ  was 
to  come  at  that  time,  he  would  not  have  said  that.  If 
he  had  read  two  or  three  verses  further  he  would  have 
found  relief  Verse  27 :  "  For  as  the  lightning  cometh 
out  of  the  east,  and  shineth  even  unto  the  west,  so ' 
shall  also  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  be."  The 
plain  meaning  is  this :  The  flilse  christs  would  be  there 
personally,  but  the  true  Christ  would  not  be  there  per- 
sonally—he would  come  as  the  lightning— ^m  povoer  and 
glory.  They  could  see  the  folse  christs  personally,  but 
they  would  not  see  Christ  in  person,  but  manifestations 
of  his  power  and  gloty.  Here  is  another  evidence  that 
coming  was  not  a  personal  coming,  but  a  comino-  "  in 
power  and  glory." 


322  Oral  Discussion. 

The  gentleman  contended,  that  his  judgment  day  was 
to  take  place  when  Christ  would  come  to  judge  the 
nations,  and  he  read  this  passage :  "  And  before  him  shall 
be  gathered  all  nations."  Matt.  xxv.  31.  But,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  criticism  on  the  words  "  all  nations," 
that  was  to  be  only  a  national  judgment,  and  does  not 
pertain  to  the  immortal  world,  because  there  are  no  na- 
tions there.  You  remember  what  he  said  yesterday  about 
this  passage  I  quoted,  "All  nations  whom  thou  hast 
made  shall  come  and  worship  before  thee,  O  Lord,  and 
glorify  thy  name."  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  "  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered," said  Mr.  Sweeney,  "  that  we  are  not  debating 
about  nations,  but  about  those  who  belong  to  no  nation." 
"  A  blessing,"  he  continued,  "  promised  to  a  nation  may 
not  reach  one  who  has  gone  into  the  eternal  world." 
If  he  believed  this  yesterday,  of  course  he  believes  it 
to-day ;  if  it  was  true  then,  it  is  true  now.  Then,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  showing,  when  Christ  promised  to 
come,  and  judge  "  all  nations,"  separating  them  as  a 
shepherd  divides  his  sheep  from  the  goats,  placing  one 
on  his  right  and  the  other  on  his  left,  awarding  life  to  one, 
and  everlasting  punishment  to  the  other,  he  did  not 
mean  judgment  or  punishment  in  "the  eternal  world," 
for  that  was  to  be  only  a  judgment  of  nations,  and  a 
judgment  of  "a  nation  may  not  reach  one  who 

HAS     gone     into     the     ETERNAL  WORLD,"    tO    USC    Mr. 

Sweeney's  words.  According  to  his  own  showing,  the 
coming  "  in  power  and  glory,"  the  judgment  of  the 
nations,  and  the  everlasting  punishment,  in  Matt.  xxv. 
31-46,  all  I'elate  to  this  world.  The  judgment  and 
punishment  were  national  only. 

I  have  nothing  more  to  do.  This  discussion  has  vir- 
tually closed.     Truth  is  powerful  and  must  prevail.     I 


Judgment — Punishment.  323 

expect  my  friend  will  flounder  through  another  day, 
and  I  shall  generally  occupy  my  allotted  time,  but  he 
might  as  well  go  home  on  the  first  train. 

He  contends  that  all  those  passages  that  speak  of 
Christ's  coming  "in  power  and  glory"  to  "judge  the 
quick  and  dead,"  to  "judge  the  world,"  and  banish  some 
to  "  everlasting  punishment,"  "  everlasting  destruction," 
— I  say  he  contends  that  all  these  relate  to  the  same  time 
and //ac5  that  the  passage  in  Matt.  xxv.  31-46  relates 
to;  and,  as  that  only  speaks  of  a  national  judgment,  he 
has  not  a  text  left  to  prove  his  future  judgment,  and 
future  endless  hell.  I  repeat,  he  has  not  one  left. 
If  he  thinks  he  has,  let  him  produce  it. 

I  do  not  deem  it  necessary  to  say  another  word  about 
the  t}'-pical  death  of  the  high  priest.  The  gentleman  has 
only  replied  by  assertions.  Let  the  hearers  judge  be- 
tween us.  He  did  not  pay  much  attention,  he  said,  to 
my  reading  from  "  Scheme  of  Redemption"  about 
the  serpent  murdering  all  mankind.  He  had  better 
heed  what  I  read,  for  the  author  of  that  book  is  Presi- 
dent of  one  of  his  colleges,  and  a  big  man  in  the  church. 
Perhaps  my  friend  agrees  with  said  President,  that  the 
serpent  did  that  big  job. 

Mr.  Sweeney  has  at  last  reached  the  subject  of  "  end- 
less punishment."  He  has  told  us  several  times,  during 
this  discussion,  that  he  uses  "  only  Bible  terms  when 
talking  about  punishment."  He  will  hardly  pretend, 
that  the  phrase  "endless  punishment "  is  a  "  Bible  term."^ 
He  knows  it  is  not.  The  truth  is,  the  terms  "  endless 
punishment,"  "  endless  woe,"  "  endless  suffering,"  "  end- 
less hell,"  "  endless  death,"  are  not  in  the  Bible  once 
from  Genesis  to  Revelation.  Let  that  be  remembered 
It  is  curious  enough,  if  endless  woe  is  really  true,  that 


324  Oral  Discussion. 

such  words  do  not  occur  even  once  within  the  lids  of 
the  good  book. 

The  authors  of  the  "  Book  of  Mormon,"  so  called, 
believed  in  endle.ss  punishment,  and  they  have  expressed 
their  faith  in  clear  language,  "  The  wicked,"  that  book 
says,  "  are  to  suffer  endless  misery,"  "  endless  woe," 
"shall  be  consigned  to  a  state  of  endless  misery,"  "go  to 
an  endless  hell:"  and  it  truly  ternis  such  a  place  "  an 
awful  hell."  Pages  181,  196,  217,  218,  386,  376.  Not 
one  of  these  are  Bible  phrases.  My  friend  gets  his 
dialect  from  Joe  Smith,  not  from  the  Christian  scriptures. 
Mahomet,  too,  was  an  ardent  defender  of  my  friend's 
theory;  and  in  the  Koran  he  threatens  the  wicked,  as 
does  my  friend,  in  pure  orthodox  style.  He  tells  them 
they  shall  suffer  "immortal  agony,"  "endless  torments," 
"be  boiled  in  hell,"  "be  fuel  of  hell" — of  "a  raging 
hell."  My  friend  would  have  no  difficulty  in  sustaining 
his  proposition  if  the  Koran  or  the  Book  of  Mormon 
was  his  Bible,  or  Joe  Smith  or  Mahomet  his  prophet. 
His  brother  Smith  and  brother  Mahomet  are  clear  as 
the  mid-day  sun  on  the  endless  punishment  question. 
They  mean  endless  misery,  and  they  say  it.  The  Bible 
does  not  say  it,  and  I  have  no  thought  it  means  it. 

But  who  is  to  suffer  endless  punishment  according  to 
the  gentleman's  theory }  Let  us  see.  He  tells  us,  that 
all  who  die  without  forgiveness,  that  is,  die  in  their  sins, 
must  suffer  endless  punishment.  His  theology  also  is, 
that  all  adults,  dying  without  baptism,  die  unforgiven, 
die  in  their  sins.  As  I  understand  him,  and  his  church, 
they  affirm  both  of  these  propositions.  The  first  propo- 
sition, he  boldly  defends  in  this  discussion.  The  second 
he  don't  want  to  say  much  about  on  this  occasion. 
To  show  that  he  really  docs  mean  there  is  no  salvation 


Judgment — Punishment.  335 

without  baptism,  I  will  read  from  a  sermon  of  his, 
preached  in  Chicago,  June  4,  1869,  and  published  in  the 
Gospel  Echo^  one  of  his  denominational  journals : 

" '  The  washing  of  regeneration '  does,  beyond  all 
controversy,  mean  immersion.  Hence,  persons  are 
brought  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  and,  hence,  to  salva- 
tion, by  IMMERSION.  My  friends,  suppose  I  were  to 
convince  you  that  I  possess  boundless  wealth,  and  were 
to  say,  '  He  that  believes  and  is  immersed  shall  have 
$50,000;'  would  you  understand  that  immersion  was 
made  a  condition  of  obtaining  the  $50,000.-^  I  think 
you  would.  How  long  would  you  stand  to  listen  to  him 
who  would  attempt  to  convince  you  that  you  could  ob- 
tain the  $50,000  about  as  well  without  immersion  as 
with  it,  it  being  'a  mere  outward  ordinance'.?  Not 
very  long,  I  think.  You  would  be  your  own  interpreter 
in  that  case,  there  being  so  many  dollars  at  stake;  you 
would  be  immersed,  pei-haps,  '  the  same  hour  of  the 
night;'  and  you  would  want  to  make  certain  work  of  it. 
You  could  afford  to  risk  no  doubtful  modes  of  immer- 
sion, resting  upon  fallible  church  authority;  you  would 
want  to  be  immersed  beyond  a  doubt.  *  *  *  And 
while  this  case  stands  on  record  I  shall  be  very  slow  to 
believe  that  the  Lord  now  in  ANY  WAY  gives  men 
assurance  that  their  sins  are  forgiven  till  they  obey  the 
Gospel  as  Saul  was  required  to  do" — that  is,  be  im- 
mersed— "and  as  'every  creature'  is  i^equired  to  do." 

I  substitute  immersion  for  baptism  in  these  extracts, 
and  in  all  that  follow,  as  he  and  his  brethren  contend, 
that  the  Greek  should  be  thus  rendered.  Mr.  Sweeney 
does  not  mean  that  immersion  is  the  only  condition  of 
salvation ;  but,  if  these  words  of  his  mean  anything,  they 
mean  there  is  no  salvation  without  immersion.  In  the 
last  sentence  I  read,  speaking  of  Paul's  baptism,  Mr. 
Sweeney  says,  "  While  this  stands  on  record  I  shall  be 
very  slow  to  believe  that  the  Lord  now  in  ANY  WAY 


326  Oral  Disctcssion. 

gives  men  assurance  that  their  sins  are  forgiven  till  they 
do  just  as  Paul  did" — are  immersed  in  water.  His  idea 
is,  that  Paul's  sins  could  not  have  been  forgiven  without 
immersion,  and  hence  no  one's  sins  can  be  forgiven 
without  immersion. 

Rev.  B.  H.  Smith,  President  of  the  Christian  Univer- 
sity of  Canton,  Mo.,  and  a  prominent  man  in  Mr. 
Sweeney's  church,  goes  even  farther,  if  possible,  than 
his  brother  Sweeney.  He  promised,  when  I  resided  in 
St.  Louis,  to  write  twelve  articles  in  my  Magazine^  in 
defense  of  the  proposition,  that  water  baptism  is  a  con- 
dition of  salvation^  and  I  was  to  write  twelve  in  reply. 
He  wrote  seven^  and  I  could  not  coax  him  to  wi"ite  an- 
other word.  I  proved,  if  his  proposition  was  true,  that 
all  mankind  would  be  lost  in  hell  eternally,  except  the 
little  squad  who  were  immersed ;  that  his  creed  damned 
all  but  his  party;  unchurched  all  but  his  church.  He 
saw  it,  and  felt  it,  and  so,  to  prevent  further  exposure, 
silently  retired  from  the  field.  One  or  two  of  his  de- 
nominational papers  published  part  of  the  letters,  and 
refused  to  publish  the  balance  that  were  written.  But, 
in  the  Christian  Pioneer^  one  of  Mr.  Sweeney's  denom- 
inational papers,  Mr.  Smith  delivers  himself  as  follows: 

"Immersion  is  for  the  remission  of  sins;  then,  a  per- 
son's sins  ai"e  not  remitted  unless  he  is  immersed. 
Whosesoever  sins  are  not  remitted  are  retained^  savs 
Christ.  There  are  but  two  classes.  Now  the  honest 
paido-baptist " — that  is,  the  honest  Christian  who  is 
sprinkled — not  immersed — "  lives  and  dies  without  re- 
mission, because  he  is  not  immersed.  If  his  sins  are  not 
remitted,  they  are  retained.  If  retained  down  to  his 
death,  he  dies  in  his  sins.  What  does  Jesus  say  of 
those  who  die  in  their  sins.''  '  Whither  I  GO  ye  can- 
not COME.'     John  viii.  21." 


Judgment — Punishment,  327 

What  is  that  but  sending  all  to  hell,  who  are  not  im- 
mersed?    He  continues  in  the  same  strain : 

"  It  will  be  conceded,  that  all  who  are  really  subjects 
of  this  kingdom,  at  death,  will  be  ultimately  saved;  but 
a  person  must  be  immersed  before  he  can  become 
A  subject  of  this  kingdom.  Here  is  a  class,  subjects 
of  the  kingdom  here  at  death,  which  the  Scriptures  cer- 
tainly 'determine'  shall  be  ultimately  saved.  Another 
class  " — paido-baptists,  those  who  sprinkle — "  are  those 
who  are  not  subjects  of  this  kingdom  at  death.  One  class 
die  in  the  kingdom;  another  die  out  of  the  kingdom. 
Bro.  W.  says  both  classes  or  conditions  of  people" — that 
is,  those  sprinkled  and  those  immersed — "will  be  ulti- 
mately saved.  Then  God  has  made  provision  for  the 
ultimate  salvation  of  one  class  or  condition,  and  an- 
other provision  for  another  class  or  condition;  and 
both  classes  of  people  have  the  same  Bible  and  the  same 
capacity,  and  the  same  opportunity !  Again  I  ask,  show 
me  a  promise  God  has  ever  made  to  the  unimmersed! 
The  Scriptures  nowhere  'determine'  the  ultimate  salva- 
tion of  any  who  never  enter  the  kingdom.  There  is  not 
the  SHADOW  of  an  inference  to  sustain  such  a  proposi- 
tion. What  will  you  do  with  those  who  have  minds 
and  Bibles,  including  every  paido-baptist  under  heaven  .^ 
Is  it  not  strange  that  the  necessity  arises  for  me  to  argue 
this  question  of  honesty  and  sincerity,  with  one  who 
claims  to  be  a  preacher  in  the  Christian  church! — the 
grandest  device  the  devil  ever  invented — the 
old  lullaby  of  sectarianism  which  we  have 
FOUGHT  so  long  AND  HARD.  VVas  Uzza  koticst  when 
he  touched  the  ark  }  Were  those  men  honest  when  they 
offered  strange  fire  upon  the  altar.?  Was  Saul  honest 
when  he  persecuted  the  saints.''  Is  the  Bible  a  standard 
of  right.?" 

Pi-esident  Smith  is  amazed  that  "  one,  who  claims 
to  be  a  preacher  in  the  Christian  church,"  should  think 
for  a  moment,  that  a  person  who  honestly  and  sincerely 


328  Oral  Discussion. 

believes  differently  from  him  concerning  water  baptism, 
can  be  saved.  He  evidently  thinks  such  preachers  are 
scarce  in  his  church,  and  ought  to  be  scarcer.  This 
matter  of  honesty  and  sincerity^  he  thinks,  is  "  the  grand- 
est device  the  devil  ever  invented."  I  find  the  same 
horrible  dogma  advocated  by  the  editor  of  the  Christian 
Pioneer.,  from  which  paper  these  extracts  are  taken.  In 
a  number  dated  June  34,  1869,  I  read  as  follows: 

"  Some  of  our  religious  neighbors  are  hon*ified  at  the 
consequences,  if  immersion  be  for  the  remission  of  sins. 
They  reason  that  if  it  be  true,  then  all  who  have  not 
been  immersed  have  not  the  remission  of  sins,  and  must 
be  lost,  unless  God  will  save  them  without  remission." 

Observe,  he  does  not  deny  that  the  alleged  "conse- 
quences" are  legitimate.  He  rather  admits  they  are,  and 
tries  to  apologize  for  a  creed  that  would  disgrace  a  Nero 
or  a  Caligula.     Hear  him : 

"  The  Bible  gives  us  not  the  privilege  to  reason  as  to 
the  CONSEQUENCES  if  that  be  accepted.  We  have  no 
right  to  paralyze  our  faith  in  the  word,  and  stultify  our 
reason,  with  the  questions  what  will  become  of  the 
heathen,  what  will  become  of  all  who  do  not  understand 
the  Gospel,  and  have  obeyed  something  else."  *  * 
"  No  matter  what  the  consequences  may  be;  no  mat- 
ter if  thousands  of  great  and  learned  men  did  not  do  so 
and  so;  no  matter  if  our  parents,  however  sincere  and 
religious  they  may  have  been,  did  not  do  so  and  so;  if 
the  Book  says  so  and  so,  we  must  do  it,  or  we  cannot  be 
saved.  If  the  pious  dead  did  not  do  these,  it  will  be  no 
excuse  for  our  neglect.  When  the  Lord  says  that  im- 
mersion is  for  the  reinission  of  sins,  and  that  it  saves  us, 
we  have  no  right  to  demur.  It  is  at  his  own  peril  that 
any  man  or  woman  docs  so." 

In  the  same  paper  I  find  another  article,  in  which  the 


Judgment — Punishment.  329 

writer  contends  that  being  ignorant  of  God's  will  in 
the  matter  of  immersion^  and  other  subjects,  is  NO  ex- 
cuse WHATEVER,  let  the  plea  come  from  pagan  or 
christian  land.  These  are  the  words :  "  There  is  no  plea 
for  ignorance  of  the  Will  of  God."  "  His  Will  is  de- 
clared to  man,  and  if  he  does  not  do  it,  the  fault  is  his 
own."  We  have  seen  that  President  Smith  of  the 
Christian  University  tells  us  that  the  plea  of  "  honesty 
and  sincerity"  in  an  error,  is  '-'■  the  grandest  device  the 
devil  ever  invented." 

When  our  friend  advocates  the  endless  punishment  of 
sinners^  we  know  what  he  means.  When  his  brethren 
advocate  it,  we  know  what  they  mean.  The  doctrine 
is,  that  all  who  die  unimmersed  die  sinners.^  die  in  their 
sins.,  and,  as  there  is  no  regeneration  beyond  the  grave, 
so  they  contend,  they  must  all  suffer  endless  punishment. 

I  will  now  attend  to  his  proof  of  endless  punishment. 
He  admitted  that  everlasting  does  not  always  mean  end- 
less. Then  how  does  he  know  it  means  endless  in  the 
passages  he  read?  May  they  not  be  places  where  it 
does  not  mean  endless  ?  Now,  he  must  show  it  means 
endless  in  those  passages.     Let  us  see  his  evidence. 

1.  He  said,  "  It  always  covers  the  whole  of  the  period 
to  which  it  is  applied."  That  is,  if  it  is  applied  to  one 
year,  it  means  one  year;  if  it  is  applied  to  a  lifetime,  it 
means  a  lifetime.  Or,  in  other  words,  if  everlasting 
means  one  hour,  or  one  day,  or  one  year,  it  means  one 
hour,  one  day,  or  one  year !     That  is  his  first  evidence ! 

2.  "  In  these  passages  it  is  applied  to  the  state  into 
which  men  go  after  death"!  Here  he  assumes  just 
what  he  ought  to  prove.  It  has  been  proved,  over  and 
over  again;  that  the  passages  do  not  refer  to  the  future 
state.     They  were  to  be  fulfilled  when  Christ  would 

28 


33^  Oral  Discussion. 

« 

come  in  the  generation  in  which  he  lived.  Then  the 
nations  were  to  be  judged;  and  he  has  told  us,  time  and 
again,  that  what  is  spoken  of  concerning  nations  does 
not  relate  to  the  future  xvorld.  Besides,  there  is  not  one 
ivord  in  the  context  of  either  passage  about  death,  the 
resurrection,  or  a  future  world.     Not  a  word. 

3.  He  said,  "  The  life  is  called  everlasting  life,  and 
the  punishment  is  everlasting — one  will  continue  as  long 
as  the  other."  He  then  assumed — for  where  proof  is 
wanted  he  gives  only  assumption — that  this  everlasting 
life  is  immortality  beyond  the  grave.  Now,  a  man 
who  reads  the  New  Testament  ought  to  know  better 
than  that.  It  is  the  life  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
of  the  Gospel  kingdom.  Hence,  Jesus  says,  "Come, 
ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom."  This 
kingdom  was  to  be  established  when  he  would 
come;  and  the  faithful  were  to  enjoy  its  blessedness. 
The  blessedness  of  this  kingdom  is  often  called  life, 
everlasting  life.  John  says,  "We  know  that  we  have 
passed  from  death  unto  life."  He  then  enjoyed  that  life. 
Jesus  says,  "  He  that  believeth  on  me  hath  everlasting 
lifer  This  is  Gospel  life — the  life  of  the  kingdom  of 
Christ.  All  Christians  are  members  of  this  kingdom, 
and  partake  of  this  life.  You  see,  Chi-ist  is  not  speaking 
about  death,  the  resurrection,  or  of  the  future  world. 
He  is  talking  about  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom 
on  earth,  and  its  blessedness.  While  one  is  a  member 
of  that  kingdom  he  enjoys  the  life  of  that  kingdom. 
If  he  falls  from  grace,  he  no  longer  partakes  of  that  life, 
but  is  morally  dead,  suffers  punishment.  But  this  life 
with  a  person  may  end,  and  this  punishment  with  a  per- 
^  son  may  end. 
'"^  The   gentleman   again  assumed^  that   those  passages 


jfudgmeni— Punishment.  331 

relate  to  the  resurrection,  to  the  end  of  the  Christian 
dispensation,  and  read  from  i  Cor.  xv.  In  that  glorious 
chapter,  the  apostle  speaks  of  the  coming  of  Christ,  to 
deliver  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  but  there  is  not  a  word 
there  about  judgmctif  or  fiinisJvnent.  As  we  have 
seen,  when  the  kingdom  was  established^  Christ  came 
in  power  and  glory,  as  a  king,  as  a  judge.  The  judg- 
ment, the  reign  of  Christ  then  began.  Then  was  the 
beginning  of  the  reign  of  Christ.  The  faithful  entered 
that  kingdom  and  partook  of  its  blessedness,  its  life. 
The  unfiiithful  were  out  of  it,  and  in  a  condition  of 
moral  death — were  punished.  When  Jesus  speaks  of 
establishing  that  kingdom,  when  he  speaks  of  coming 
in  power  and  glory  in  that  kingdom,  there  is  not  a  word 
about  death,  the  resuri'ection,  or  the  future  world.  Not 
a  word.  But  in  i  Cor.  xv.,  where  the  apostle  speaks  of 
Christ  coming  at  the  end  of  his  reign,  there  is  not  a 
word  about  judgment  or  funishinent.  Yet,  according 
to  my  friend,  then  the  judgment  commenced,  then  the 
everlasting  punishment  commenced.  But  Paul  says  not 
a  word  about  either  subject.  He  speaks  about  destruc- 
tion, and  tells  what  will  be  destroyed — all  rule,  all  au- 
thority, all  power,  all  death.  Those  are  the  enemies 
that  will  be  destroyed.  But  if  St.  Paul  believed  that 
heaven,  earth  and  hell  would  be  judged  on  that  occa- 
sion; and  that  countless  millions  of  mankind  would  be 
doomed  to  be  damned  to  all  eternity,  would  he  not  have 
said  something  about  it.?  If  he  had  believed  that,  would 
he  have  said,  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ 
shall  all  be  made  alive  " }  Would  he  have  said,  "  The 
last  enemy  —  death  —  shall  be  destroyed".?  Would  he 
have  said,  that  "  all  things  shall  be  subdued  to  God,  that 
God  may  be  all  in  all "  ?     Paul  never  spoke  or  wrote  a 


V 


333  Oral  Discussion. 

Greek  word  that  is  rendered  hell  in  our  Bible,  but  once^ 
and  that  is  in  this  chapter,  and  there  he  says  liell  sliall 
be  DESTROYED.  At  the  resurrection,  then,  all  rule^ 
autJiority^  -power^  deaths  and  hell^  are  to  be  destroyed. 
But  Mr.  Sweeney  contends  they  will  all  then  begin  their 
infernal  reign,  at  least  0}te  of  his  hells  will,  and  reign 
eternally. 

It  is  clear,  then,  that  these  two  passages  do  not  teach 
endless  punishment.  He  will  have  to  try  again.  As  I 
have  a  few  moments  more  I  will  tell  you  where  he 
locates  one  of  his  hells,  one  of  the  infernal  regions  he  so 
ardently  believes  in. 

In  the  Chicago  Daily  Tribune  of  December  38,  186S, 
is  a  sermon  of  his  reported,  on  Spiritism;  and  in  it 
he  discusses  the  locality  of  the  hell  spoken  of  in  2  Peter 
ii.  4.  "  For  if  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned, 
but  cast  them  down  to  hell"  etc.  He  sums  up  his  con- 
victions of  the  locality  of  this  place  in  these  words :  "  / 
thiiik^  therefore^  that  by  Tartarus" — die  Greek  word 
rendered  hell  in  that  place — '•''Peter  7neant  the  dark ^ 
regions  encompassing  earth — our  atmosphere — the  air." 
This  is  definite  enough.  Hell  is  "  the  dark  region 
ENCOMPASSING  THE  EARTH;"  and,  that  we  may  know 
exactly  where  that  "  dark  region"  is  located,  he  says  it  is 
"our  ATMOSPHERE — THE  AIR."  We  Icnow  now exactly 
where  that  famous  place  is  situated.  It  is  not  in  the 
center  of  the  earth,  and  the  volcanoes  its  chimneys;  it  is 
not  in  a  wild  comet,  or  in  the  blazing  sun;  it  is  the 
atmosphere  all  around  this  earth  of  ours.  Columbus 
enjoys  immortal  renown  for  having  discovered  this  con- 
tinent; but  brother  Sweeney  beats  him — he  has  dis- 
covered a  world — "the  world  of  v/oe;"  and,  if  it  was 
not  already  named,  I  should  move  that  it  be  called — 
Sweeney. 


Judgment — Punishment.  333 

We  not  only  know  now  where  hell  is  located,  but  we 
know  its  length,  breadth,  and  depth.  Wise  men  tell  us, 
that  the  atmosphere  extends  forty-five  miles  from  the 
earth,  all  around  it;  and,  knowing  the  dimensions  of  the 
earth,  we  can  calculate  the  square  miles  of  the  devil's 
dominions.  If  our  friend  is  right,  satan  has  actually 
blockaded  our  planet,  and  every  soul  that  goes  to  heaven 
has  to  run  the  blockade;  and  that  must  be  rather  dan- 
gerous business,  if  the  accounts  we  have  of  his  industry, 
watchfulness  and  prowess  are  reliable.  Only  think  of 
^din^  forty-Jive  miles  right  through  the  very  center  of  that 
old  rascal's  kingdom!  It  must  be  a  perilous  adventure. 
But  then  the  trip  must  be  made  by  every  soul  that 
reaches  paradise.  The  only  road  from  earth  to  heaven 
is  through  hell. 

But  my  friend  tells  us,  that  the  air,  hell,  is  "  the  dark 
region  encompassing  the  earth."  That  is  another  won- 
derful discovery  the  gentleman  has  made.  I  have  always 
supposed  that  the  atmosphere  was  light,  save  when 
shaded  by  the  earth  or  moon.  Recently,  two  men  in  a 
balloon  went  seven  miles  right  up  into  the  air,  and  it  was 
light  up  there,  and  light  as  far  as  they  could  see.  But 
then,  Mr.  Sweeney  says  the  air  is  a  "dark  region,"  and 
we  must  believe  it,  for  do  n't  he  know  } 

Hell  is  generally  supposed  to  be  a  very  hot  place.  I 
once  heard  a  preacher  relate,  that  hell  is  so  hot  that  if  a 
soul  were  to  be  taken  out  of  it,  and  put  into  a  smelting 
furnace,  red  hot,  he  would  freeze  to  death  in  five  minutes. 
True,  the  men  just  mentioned,  who  went  seven  miles 
into  the  very  heart  of  hell,  although  it  was  August, 
came  near  freezing  to  death,  it  was  so  cold  up  there. 
But  then,  they  must  have  mistook  their  feelings — 
they  must  have  come  near  roasting  instead  of  freezing, 


334  Oral  Discussion. 

for  do  n't  these  preachers  know  all  about  the  tempera- 
ture of  hell? 

But  there  will  hardly  be  any  more  ballooning  after  this 
astounding  discovery  of  our  second  Columbus,  that  hell 
is  in  the  atmosphere.  Who  will  have  the  courage  to 
venture  up  there  after  this  ?  Who  will  dare  climb  a 
tree,  or  go  to  the  top  of  the  Chicago  or  St.  Louis  court 
house,  after  this  amazing  announcement.'' 

But  our  friend  has  unwittingly  told  us  the  truth  about 
his  hell^ — it  is  all  air — all  GAS.     \Ti7ne  expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  fifth  speech.] 

It  would  seem  from  the  gentleman's  remarks  in  the 
beginning  of  his  speech  just  delivered,  that  he  knows  no 
difference  between  appealing  to  classic  writers  and  emi- 
nent scholars  to  determine  the  meaning  of  a  tvord^  and 
appealing  to  what  are  called  Doctors  of  divinity  to  de- 
termine the  teaching  of  a  passage  of  scripture^  about 
the  meaning  of  the  words  of  which  there  is  no  contro- 
versy. In  my  discussion  with  Mr.  Logan  I  did  appeal 
to  classic  writers  and  lexicographers  to  determine  the 
meaning  of  a  single  word,  when  making  an  argument 
purely  philological.  That  I  would  do  again.  But  was 
that  the  purpose  for  which  my  friend  appealed  to  Clarke, 
Barnes,  Hammond,  etc. .''  I  think  "every  school  boy" 
can  see  the  difference.  As  to  the  meaning  of  one  pas- 
sage— Matt.  xvi.  27 — the  gentleman  finds  a  few  com- 
mentators who  agree  with  him,  and  what  a  w^onderful 
ado  he  makes  over  the  little  circumstance!  He  imagines 
I  am  thrown  into  "  spasms" !  I  am  perfectly  cool,  how- 
ever.    I  care  little  for  the  opinions  he  reads,  and  less 


Judgment — Punishment.  335 

for  his  raving  and  blustering  over  them.  I  repeat  all  I 
said  about  Dr.  Clarke,  as  a  commentator.  I  say  he  is 
not  indorsed,  as  such,  even  by  the  Methodists;  and  I 
am  entirely  willing  for  those  who  know,  to  judge  be- 
tween my  statement  and  the  gentleman's.  I  generally 
know  what  I  am  saying  when  I  make  such  statements. 

The  distinction  I  have  made  and  maintained,  between 
the  coming  of  the  Lord  "  in  his  glory,  with  his  mighty 
angels,"  and  his  coming  "in  his  kingdom,"  gives  the 
worthy  gentleman  no  little  trouble ;  and  I  am  not  sur- 
prised that  it  does;  for  it  lays  the  ax  to  the  root  of  the 
tree  of  Universalism.  He  refers  us  to  Luke  xxi.  27-33, 
where  again  both  events  are  referred  to,  but  that  pas- 
sage affords  him  no  support,  as  I  shall  now  show.  It 
requires  but  little  attention  to  this  passage  to  see  that 
two  different  events  are  spoken  of,  just  as  in  Matt.  xvi. 
27,  28.  In  the  27th  verse,  we  have  the  "  Son  of  man 
coming  in  a  cloud  with  power  and  great  glory,"  fore- 
told, and  the  disciples  are  told  to  "  then  look  up,  and 
lift  up  your  heads,  for  your  redemption  draiucth  tzigh" 
Now  I  say  that  this  was  not  fulfilled  either  when  Jeru- 
salem was  destroyed,  or  when  the  kingdom  was  "set 
up."  J'F/^a/ "  redemption"  did  the  disciples  expect  at 
the  coming  of  Christ  in  his  glory  ?  For  what  redemption 
did  they  wait?  Let  Paul  tell :  "  For  the  earnest  expecta- 
tion of  the  creature  waiteth  for  the  manifestation  of  the 
sons  of  God,  *  *  *  for  the  creature  itself  also  shall 
be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the 
glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God.  For  we  know 
that  the  whole  creation  groaneth  and  travaileth  in  pain 
together  until  now.  And  not  only  they,  but  ourselves 
also,  who  have  the  first  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  even  we  our- 
selves groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for  the  adoption, 


33^  Oral  Discussion. 

to  wit,  the  redcmptio7t  of  our  body ;  for  we  are  saved  by 
hope."  Rom.  viii.  19-24.  The  disciples,  then,  were 
"  saved  by  hope ; "  and  that  was  a  hope  of  "  redemp- 
tion;" and  the  redemption  for  which  they  hoped  was  of 
tlieir  ^'■body;"  and  all  this  they  expected  when  Christ 
should  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints — to  "  change 
our  vile  body,  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like  unto  his 
glorious  body."  This  hope  was  evidently  grounded 
upon  the  very  language  my  friend  quotes  from  Luke 
xxi.  27,  2S.  This,  then,  affords  still  further  proof  that 
the  "glorious  appearing"  of  Christ  is  still  future.  The 
"  redemption  "  of  the  saints,  which  involves  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  is  connected  with  that  coming;  but 
the  "  redemption  "  of  the  saints  is  yet  future ;  and,  there- 
fore, the  glorious  appearing  of  Christ  is  yet  future. 
But  Mr.  Manford  argues — or  rather,  he  says — that  "  the 
Son  of  man  coming  in  a  cloud  with  power  and  great 
glory,"  of  the  27th  verse,  is  the  same  as  "  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  near,"  of  the  31st.  Beyond  question,  he  is 
wrong  in  this.  Let  us  see  if  this  cannot  be  demon- 
strated. We  agree  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  to  be 
set  up — in  other  words,  that  Christ  was  to  come  "  in  his 
kingdom  " — in  the  lifetime  of  the  apostles.  We  agree 
that  the  kingdom  was  then  set  up.  Paul  and  John  both 
expressly  say  that  they  were  in  that  kingdom,  and,  of 
course,  so  were  all  the  other  apostles  and  first  disciples. 
But,  in  the  kingdom  as  they  were,  we  have  seen  that 
they  waited  for  their  redemption  which  they  expected 
when  Christ  should  come  in  his  glory.  Therefore  he 
did  not  come  in  his  glory  when  he  set  up  his  kingdom. 
But  furthei*,  John  was  "in  the  kingdom,"  he  said,  when 
he  wrote  the  book  of  Revelation;  and,  therefore,  the 
kingdom  had  already  been  set  up — Christ  had  already 


Judgment — Punishment.  337 

come  "  in  his  kingdom" — but  in  that  book  John  speaks 
of  the  very  coming  described  in  Luke  xxi.  27,  as  future. 
Christ  had  come  in  his  kingdom ;  had  set  up  his  king- 
dom ;  John  was  in  that  kingdom ;  and  yet  he  speaks  of 
the  very  coming  that  Mr.  Manford  blends  with  the  set- 
ting up  of  the  kingdom,  as  still  in  the  future  !  Rev.  i. 
7:  "Behold,  he  comes  amidst  the  clouds;  and  every 
eye  shall  see,  and  they  who  pierced  him;  and  all  the 
tribes  of  the  earth  shall  wail  because  of  him." 

The  trouble  with  my  o]3ponent  is,  that  he  observes  no 
distinctions;  but  confounds  events  that  are  different  in 
character,  different  in  time,  and  differently  described  all 
through  the  Bible.  And  when  I  show  this,  all  he  can 
do  is  to  call  for  a  few  "Doctors"  that  have  fallen  into 
the  same  mistake  under  which  he  labors.  He  has,  by 
his  miserably  false  interpretations  of  Bible  teaching,  put 
the  hope  of  the  Gospel,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  the 
glory  of  the  saints,  the  "redemption  of  our  body,"  all 
in  the  past;  and  leaves  the  Gospel  about  as  the  old 
empty  shell  of  an  oyster!  And  then,  with  an  affected 
air  of  pious  and  holy  indignation,  talks  about  my  "  wild 
speculations  " ! 

Jesus  did  not  come  to  our  world  "  in  glory"  when  he 
came  first.  Neither  was  he  "glorified"  while  here,  save 
for  a  few  moments  upon  the  mount  of  transfiguration, 
and  then  his  disciples  could  not  even  look  upon  his 
glorified  person  with  natural  eyes.  Nor,  yet,  did  he 
come  from  the  grave  "in  glory."  He  was  glorified 
when  he  was  "  received  up  into  glory."  He  came  first 
in  the  flesh — in  our  nature — he  lived  in  the  flesh,  and 
was  "put  to  death  in  the  flesh" — rose  in  the  flesh,  and 
so  lived  until  he  took  his  final  leave  of  his  disciples  and 
was  "  received  up  into  glory."  He  now  lives  and  reigns 
29 


53^  Oral  Discussion. 

in  glory — in  the  glory  he  had  with  the  Father  before  the 
world  was.  He  has  promised  to  come  personally  to 
our  world  once  more — not  as  the  babe  of  Bethlehem — 
not  in  flesh  and  blood,  to  make  a  sin-offering  of  himself 
— but  "  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  and  all  the  holy  an- 
gels with  him,"  to  raise  the  dead  "  in  glory,"  to  fashion 
our  vile  body  like  unto  his  glorious  body,  to  "  gather  his 
elect  from  the  four  ^vinds;  "  and  then  "  shall  he  sit  upon 
the  throne  of  his  glory,  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered 
all  nations,  and  he  shall  separate  them,"  and  sentence 
them  to  eternal  destinies. 

But  to  prove  that  Jesus  was  here  "in  glory"  the  first 
time  he  came,  my  friend  read  from  John  xiii.  31,  32: 
"  Therefore,  when  he  was  gone  out,  Jesus  said.  Now  is 
the  Son  of  man  glorified,  and  God  is  glorified  in  him. 
If  God  be  glorified  in  him,  God  shall  also  glorify  him 
in  himself,  and  shall  straightway  glorify  him."  These 
words  were  most  unquestionably  spoken  in  anticipation 
of  his  ascension  to  glory.  The  next  verse  shows  this : 
"  Little  children,  yet  a  little  while  I  am  with  you.  Ye 
shall  seek  me ;  and,  as  I  said  unto  the  Jews,  Whither  I 
go,  ye  cannot  come,  so  now  I  say  to  you."  That  Jesus 
anticipated  his  ascension  to  glory  when  he  spoke  these 
words  is  further  manifested  by  his  prayer,  recoi'ded  in 
John  xvii.  This  prayer  was  prayed  still  later  in  his  life 
than  the  words  were  spoken  which  the  gentleman 
quoted;  and  here  he  prays:  "And  now,  O  Father, 
glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self,  with  the  glory 
which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was."  Verse  5. 
This  shows  that  when  he  was  here  our  Lord  ^vas  not 
"in  his  glory" — not  in  the  glory  that  he  /^a<^  with  the 
Father  before  he  took  upon  him  our  nature.  And  even 
when  he  prayed  this   prayer   he   did    not   expect  to  be 


Judgment — Punishment.  330 

glorified  before  his  ascension,  as  his  words,  in  the  13th 
verse,  show :  "  And  noxv  come  I  to  theer  As  this  is  a 
point  of  much  importance,  I  will  call  attention  to  an- 
other passage  that  I  consider  quite  decisive  of  the  issue 
between  us.  John  vii.  39 :  "  But  this  spake  he  of  the 
Spirit,  which  they  that  believe  on  him  should  receive, 
for  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet  given,  because  that  Jesus 
was  7iot yet  glorified'''  This  shows  not  only  that  Jesus 
was  not  then  glorified,  but  that  the  Holy  Spirit  was  to  be 
given  when  he  was  glorified.  Now,  we  all  know  that 
the  Spirit  was  not  given  until  the  first  pentecost  after  his 
ascension.  And,  in  the  light  of  these  facts,  what  be- 
comes of  the  gentleman's  loose  statement,  that  "  all  his 
comings  are  called  comings  in  glory  " .''  It  goes  to  the 
winds — and  scarcely  loses  its  place  in  his  argument,  as  it 
all  goes  together.  This  upsets  one  of  the  gentleman's 
positions,  as  to  the  coming  of  Christ  in  judgment,  if  no 
more.  I  say,  if  no  more,  because  he  has  taken  two 
positions,  at  least,  on  this  point.  One  was,  that  his 
resurrection  was  his  coming  in  judgment.  This  posi- 
tion he  assumed  when  whelmed  in  so  much  trouble  over 
the  passage  I  cited  in  Hebrews  ix.  But  since,  he  seems 
to  think  Christ's  coming  in  judgment  was  impersonal, 
and  occurred  when  Jerusalem  was  destroyed !  I  submit 
that  if  the  gentleman  has  any  m,ore  positions  on  this 
question,  so  full  of  trouble  for  his  cause,  he  ought  to  let 
us  have  them  at  once — before  the  "next  train"  comes 
along,  as  he  seems  to  think  he  can  let  me  "  take  the  next 
train,"  and  get  on  himself  quite  as  well  as  if  I  were  to 
remain. 

The  gentleman  seems  to  think  that  Christ's  final  com- 
ing cannot  be  "  glorious,"  if  he  shall  then,  as  I  think, 
"  divide    parents    and    children,    husbands   and  wives, 


34©  Oral  Discussion. 

brothers  and  sisters,  friends  and  neighbors,  sending  some 
to  heaven  and  others  to  eternal  punishment."  But  is  he 
sincere  in  this  ?  Does  he  not  beUeve  that  at  his  second 
coming,  wliich  he  tliinks  is  past,  Christ  did  "  separate 
parents  and  children,  husbands  and  wives,  brothers  and 
sisters,  friends  and  neighbors,  sending  some  'away  into 
everlasting  punishment,'  and  others  'into  life  eternal'"? 
He  certainly  does — at  least,  he  says  he  does.  And  yet 
he  tells  us  that  was  the  "glorious  appearing"  of  the 
Lord!  Any  kind  of  coming  of  the  Lord  is  glorious, 
with  my  friend,  provided  only  that  it  is  past ;  while  any 
future  coming,  and  judgment,  and  punishment,  are  in- 
glorious, heathenish,  and  exceedingly  devilish ! 

The  gentleman  read  from  some  old  hymn  book — what 
hymn  book  I  know  not — about  the  parting  of  parents 
and  children,  husbands  and  wives,  and  seemed  to  think 
there  could  be  no  glory  anywhere,  if  such  things  are  to 
occur  in  the  future.  But  he  thinks  Christ  has  already 
come  in  glory,  and  is  now  judging  in  glory;  and  are  not 
such  scenes  as  he  described  occurring  daily,  all  around  us .'' 
Husbands  and  wives  are  parted,  families  are  broken  up, 
never  more  to  come  together  as  families;  and  this  is 
often  done,  too,  by  the  preaching  of  his  brethren  and 
sisters,  the  Spiritists,  who,  with  him,  preach  love  up,  and 
hell  down !  And  yet  he  thinks  Christ  has  already  come 
in  glory,  and  is  now  sitting  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory 
judging  the  world ! 

"Immediately  after  the  tribulation  of  those  days," 
comes  up  again.  The  gentleman  seems  not  to  under- 
stand me  at  this  point.  Did  I  say  "  immediately  does 
not  mean  immediately".''  I  said  that  "the  tribulation 
of  those  days"  meant  more,  and  vastly  more,  than  the 
destruction  of  the  city  "of  Jerusalem.      Tliat  was  only 


Judgment — Punishment.  341 

"  the  beginning  of  soiTOWS."  The  Jews  are  still  suffer- 
ing the  "  days  of  vengeance,"  or  "  the  tribulation  of 
those  days;"  and,  therefore,  "immediately  after  the 
tribulation  of  those  days"  has  not  yet  come.  Now,  I 
hope  I  am  understood. 

I  did  not '•'•  2i&vi\\\.  that  Christ  told  the  disciples  [then 
living]  that  they  would  [live  to]  see  him  come  in  power 
and  glory."  He  taught  them  the  opposite  in  that  very 
chapter — Matt.  xxiv.  The  gentleman  should  be  more 
cautious.  The  little  quibble  over  "ye"  and  "you"  is 
unworthy  a  ten-year-old  school  boy.  He  knows  that 
"'we'  is  used  to  express  men  in  general,"  but  does  not 
know,  of  course,  that  "ye"  and  "you"  liave  a  like 
meaning  in  scripture. 

The  gentleman  professed  to  read  you  Webster's  defini- 
tion of  "  generation,"  but  did  not  do  it.  He  only  garbled 
it.  Read  it  for  yourselves.  And,  by  the  way,  it  would 
be  safe  for  you  to  read  for  yourselves  the  many  other 
authors  he  scraps. 

Mr.  Manford  seems  to  think  he  has  proved  by  me 
that  the  judgment  of  Matt.  xxv.  31-46,  is  "only  na- 
tional," and,  therefore,  "  all  in  this  world."  Hence,  he 
thinks  "  the  discussion  may  as  well  close."  He  feels 
anxious  for  one  of  us  to  leave  the  city,  or  for  the  discus- 
sion to  be  otherwise  brought  to  a  "  close."  But  he  must 
make  up  his  mind  to  "  flounder "  a  little  longer.  Of 
course,  there  will  be  "nations"  when  Christ  comes  to 
judge  the  world.  He  will  come  to  this  world  where 
"  nations"  are;  "  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all 
nations."  And,  moreover,  the  dead  will  be  raised  and 
judged  too,  as  I  have  shown.  But  the  judgment  will 
be  a  judgment  of  the  people  in  their  individual  and  not 
in  their  national,  capacity.     To  show  tliat  I  am  right  in 


342  Oral  Discussion. 

this,  I  will  read  from  the  thirty-fourth  to  the  fortieth 
verse : 

"  Then  shall  the  King  say  unto  them  on  his  right 
hand,  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  king- 
dom prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world ; 
for  I  was  an  hungered,  and  ye  gave  me  meat:  I  was 
thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink :  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye 
took  me  in :  naked,  and  ye  clothed  me :  I  was  sick,  and 
ye  visited  me:  I  was  in  prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me. 
Then  shall  the  righteous  answer  him,  saying,  Lord, 
when  saw  we  thee  an  hungered,  and  fed  thee?  or  thirsty, 
and  gave  thee  drink?  When  saw  we  thee  a  stranger, 
and  took  thee  in  ?  or  naked,  and  clothed  thee  ?  Or  when 
saw  we  thee  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  came  unto  thee  ? 
And  the  King  shall  answer  and  say  unto  them.  Verily, 
I  say  unto  you,  Inasmuch  as  ye  have  done  it  unto  one 
of  the  least  of  these  my  brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto 
me." 

Here  we  have  the  basis  of  what  shall  be  the  Lord's 
decision  in  that  judgment;  and  it  shows,  beyond  all  con- 
troversy, that  it  is  to  be  a  judgment  of  persons,  and  not 
of  nations,  as  such.  The  language  is  like  that  of  the 
commission.  When  the  Lord  said,  "  Go  teach  all 
nations^  baptizing  them"  etc.,  he  did  not  mean  to  have 
his  disciples  baptize  the  nations,  as  such ;  but  the  indi- 
viduals of  all  nations.  Baptism  is  not  '•'■  national." 
Neither  is  the  judgment  to  be. 

The  gentleman  may  see,  if  he  wishes  to,  that  I  do  not 
rely  upon  the  word  "nations"  in  my  argument,  as  he 
did  in  his.  He  quoted  a  promise  of  blessing  to  "  the 
nations  of  the  earth,"  and  applied  it  to  the  dead  in  the 
spirit  world ;  while  I  show  not  merely  that  all  nations 
shall  be  gathered  before  him  when  he  comes  for  judg- 
ment, but  the  dead  also  are  to  rise  and  come  into  judg- 
ment. 


yudgment — Punishment.  343 

Endlessness  of  punishment.  Here  the  gentleman 
showed  clearly  to  us  all  that  he  did  not  know  how  or 
where  to  take  hold  of  the  argument.  He  must  take  a 
rest  on  that.  But,  meantime,  he  gave  us  a  little  of  the 
old  song.  "  Endless  punishment,  endless  woe,  endless 
suffering,  endless  hell,  endless  death,  are  not  in  the 
Bible."  And  he  thinks  "  it  is  curious  enough  if  endless 
woe  is  really  true,  that  such  words  do  not  once  occur 
within  the  lids  of  the  good  book."  Well,  there  is 
nothing  in  the  Bible  about  endless  bliss,  endless  joy, 
endless  happiness,  endless  salvation,  endless  heaven,  or 
endless  anything  else  promised  to  man.  "Endless  life" 
occurs  but  once,  and  then  it  is  neither  predicated  of  man 
or  promised  to  him.  Did  it  ever  occur  to  the  gentleman 
that  all  this  "  is  curious  enough  "  t 

We  are  told  that  endless  punishment  is  taught  in  "  the 
Book  of  Mormon  and  the  Koran."  But,  if  the  same 
language  that  the  gentleman  cites  from  those  books  were 
in  the  Bible,  he  would  call  it  "  figurative,"  "  hyperboli- 
cal," or  something  else,  and  deny  that  it  really  and  liter- 
ally taught  endless  punishment.  Let  us  suppose  endless 
and  not  eternal  were  used  as  descriptive  of  the  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked,  what  would  my  friend  then  say  ? 
He  would  then  tell  us,  that  endless  occurs  in  buj:  one 
other  place  in  the  Bible  where  it  can  be  claimed  that  it 
means  eternal;  that  endless  is  never  predicated  of  God, 
of  heaven,  of  life,  of  salvation,  and,  therefore,  it  cannot 
prove  eterjtal  punishment.  He  would  show  us  that 
endless  never  describes  the  perpetuity  of  the  Godhead, 
or  heaven,  or  the  future  life ;  and  that  as  eternal  does,  it 
would  be  the  proper  word  to  describe  the  punishment  of 
the  wicked  if  it  were  really  and  literally  eternal.  And, 
indeed,  he  could  make  a  better  showing  than  he  can  as 


344  Oral  Discussion. 

the  case  now  stands.  The  fact  is,  any  man  can  misun- 
derstand the  Bible  if  he  wants  to.  Tlie  Bible  shares  an 
infelicity  that  is  common  to  all  books.  It  is  written  in 
human  language,  and  can  be  7nisunder stood.  If  the  Book 
of  Mormon,  or  the  Koran,  were  received  as  of  divine 
authority,  and  the  Bible  was  not,  in  this  discussion,  then 
I  should  expect  my  opponent  to  figure  away  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Book  of  Mormon  and  that  of  the  Koran, 
and  stoutly  contend  that  that  of  the  Bible  is  literal,  and 
does  really  teach  eternal  punishment.  Then  he  would 
not  have  to  shift  the  Bible  teaching  off  on  me,  to  hide 
his  skepticism,  when  he  wished  to  raise  a  howl  over  the 
terrible  restraints  it  lays  upon  vice. 

Mr.  Manford  would  like  to  have  a  debate  on  baptism. 
He  wants  a  little  sympathy  from  Pedo-baptists.  I  have 
no  objection  to  his  having  it.  He  evidently  needs  sym- 
pathy from  some  good  quarter.  So  far,  he  knows  he 
has  drawn  upon  the  sympathies  of  only  such  as  are  not 
trying  to  obey  God,  and  do  not  mean  to  try  in  this 
world;  and,  therefore,  he  now  angles  for  a  little  from 
another  quarter.  His  miserable  perversions  and  distor- 
tions of  my  sermon  and  the  writings  of  my  brethren, 
from  which  he  read  only  scraps.,  convince  me  that  he 
does  not  mean  fair  dealing.  I  will,  therefore,  only  say 
in  reference  to  all  he  said  about  baptism,  that  I  have 
never  taught  that  all  the  unimmersed  will  suffer  ever- 
lasting punishment,  or  be  condemned  in  the  judgment. 
I  never  believed  it  in  my  life.  Mr.  Campbell  never 
taught  it;  but,  on  the  contrary,  expressly  disavowed  it 
all  his  life.  My  brethren  do  not  teach  it.  They,  with 
great  unanimity,  expressly  disavow  it;  and  he  who  reads 
their  writings  enough  to  make  any  use  of  them  at  all  in 
a  public  way,  knows  it.     It  is  the  man  who  willfully 


Judgment — Punishment.  345 

persists  in  disobedience  to  God  that  will  be  condemned 
when  the  Savior  comes.  It  is  for  such  that  my  friend 
stands  in  this  debate.  He  is  their  champion,  and 
whether  or  not  he  will  eternally  have  even  their  sym- 
pathies remains  for  eternity  to  reveal. 

The  gentleman  tells  us  how  he  vanquished  B.  H. 
Smith,  once  upon  a  time,  in  the  columns  of  his  maga- 
zine. But  he  did  not  tell  us  how  he  once  vanquished 
A.  Campbell  upon  the  pages  of  the  same  magazine, 
A.  Campbell  knowing  nothing  of  the  debate  till  it  was 
nearly  over!  But  as  the  gentleman  drags  Bro.  Smith 
into  this  debate  behind  the  wheels  of  his  triumphal 
chariot,  I  shall  take  the  liberty  to  express  my  opinion,  as 
Bro.  Smith  is  not  here  to  speak  for  himself,  that  Bro. 
Smith  abandoned  the  controversy  referred  to,  because  it 
was  being  run  so  low  that  he  did  not  like  to  get  down  to  it. 
I  may  be  wrong,  but  that  Is  my  guess.  And  it  may  be 
that  it  was  for  the  same  reason  that  those  "  papers  pub- 
lished part  of  the  letters  and  refused  to  publish  the  bal- 
ance that  were  written."  I  have  known  the  like  to 
occur. 

When  I  say  I  admit  that  everlasting  does  not  always 
mean  endless,  I  mean  to  say  simply  that  everlasting  is 
not  always  used  in  a  strictly  literal  sense.  What  I  mean 
by  everlasting — or  the  word  rendered  everlasting  in  the 
passages  I  have  quoted — ■"  covering  the  whole  of  the 
period  to  which  it  Is  applied,"  I  thought  the  gentleman 
would  readily  understand.  But  it  seems,  for  his  special 
benefit,  I  shall  have  to  illustrate  my  meaning.  When 
this  word  is  applied  to  the  rocks,  hills,  or  the  Jewish 
priesthood,  it  does  not  simply  describe  or  mark  a  portion 
of  their  existence,  but  it  covers  the  whole  period  of  their 
existence;  and  If,   therefore,   in  such  cases  it  does   not 


346  Oral  Discussion. 

mean  strictly  and  literally  eternal^  it  is  because  the 
period  of  the  existence  of  the  thing  it  describes  is  less 
than  eternity,  and  not  because  the  word  itself  is  not 
competent  to  describe  eternity.  Will  the  gentleman  say 
that  that  word  means  less  than  eternity  when  applied  to 
God?  I  think  not.  Well,  I  say,  when  it  is  applied  to 
life  it  always  means  eternal.  This  position  cannot  be 
refuted.  True,  men  may,  in  some  sense,  be  said  to  have 
"everlasting  life"  in  this  world;  but,  in  such  case,  ever- 
lasting describes  the  life  they  have,  and  not  the  period 
of  time  for  which  they  have  it.  When  it  is  said  that 
the  believer  "  hath-  eternal  life,"  it  is  simply  said  that  the 
''  life  he  has  is  eternal,  and  not  that  he  will  necessarily 
have  it  eter?ially.  Life  eternal,  then,  is  not  the  life  of  a 
limited  period,  though  one,  in  this  world,  may  enjoy  it 
only  for  a  limited  period.  If  I  am  correct  in  this  posi- 
tion— and  it  remains  to  be  shown  that  I  am  not — it 
follows  that  when  everlasting,  or  the  Greek  word  it 
represents,  is  applied  to  the  after-death  state  of  man's 
existence,  it  necessarily  covers  the  whole  period  of  that 
state  of  existence;  and  that,  we  agree,  is  literally  un- 
limited— eternal.  That  is  the  argument.  But  you  are 
told,  that  I  have  only  assumed  that  the  wicked  will 
"go  away  into  everlasting  punishment"  after  death. 
Whether  or  not  this  is  true,  I  am  entirely  willing  for  our 
hearers  to  decide.  I  feel  most  profoundly  impressed 
that  If  I  have  not  proved  that  the  judgment,  from  which 
the  wicked  are  to  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment, 
is  to  be  after  death,  then  no  man  can  prove  that  there  is 
to  be  atiything  after  death. 

The  gentleman  admits  that  the  going  away  into  ever- 
lasting punishment  and  the  going  away  into  life  eternal 
were  to  take  place  at  the  same  time;  but,  to  evade  the 


Judgment —  Punishment.  347 

force  of  my  argument  from  the  antithesis  of  punishment 
and  life,  he  denies  that  either  was  to  be  endless.  He 
tells  us  that  the  life,  called  eternal,  was  "  the  life  of  the 
Gospel" — was  "life  in  the  kingdom  of  God;"  and  that 
the  punishment,  called  everlasting,  was  the  opposite — 
was  moral  death,  consequent  upon  the  rejection  of  the 
Gospel.  Then,  according  to  his  teaching,  when  the 
kingdom  was  set  up  and  the  Gospel  was  preached,  those 
■who  received  the  Gospel  went  into  the  kingdom  and 
into  life  eternal;  while  those  who  rejected  the  Gospel 
remained  out  of  the  kingdom,  and  consequently  re- 
mained in  "everlasting  punishment;"  and  he  quotes 
"we  have  passed  from  death  unto  life"  to  prove  this. 
This,  of  course,  proves  that  when  John  wrote  the  words 
quoted,  he  and  his  brethren  had  passed  into  the  king- 
dom. This  fixes  the  setting  up  of  the  kingdom,  and 
hence  the  coming  of  Christ  in  his  kingdom,  hence 
the  judgment  of  Matt,  xxv.,  prior  to  the  writing 
of  the  epistle  of  John !  But  had  Jerusalem  been  de- 
stroyed when  John  wrote  his  Epistle?  Certainly  not! 
And  now,  as  the  gentleman  has  the  kingdom  set  up  and 
the  judgment  set,  and  some  already  gone  away  from  the 
judgment  into  everlasting  punishment,  and  others  into 
life  eternal,  long  before  Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  I  sub- 
mit that  he  has  no  further  use  for  the  destruction  of  that 
city,  than  other  decent  folks.  The  gentleman  must 
abandon  forever  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  as  the 
coming  of  Christ  in  judgment,  and  hence  as  the  day  of 
judgment,  from  which  the  wicked  were  to  go  away 
into  everlasting  punishment ;  or  he  will  have  two  com- 
ings of  Christ  in  his  kingdom,  two  kingdoms  set  up, 
two  distinct  days  of  judgment  for  Christ,  two  everlasting 
punishments,  and  two  eternal  lives!     But  really,  I  have 


348  Oral  Discussion. 

about  concluded  that  he  would  not  care  to  have  a  thou- 
sand days  of  judgment,  and  as  many  comings  of  Christ 
in  judgment,  and  as  many  everlasting  punishments,  pro- 
vided only  that  he  could  succeed  in  crowding  them  all 
into  \hQ.  fasti 

But  again :  According  to  my  friend.  Christians  were 
in  the  kingdom  in  apostolic  times,  had  the  life  of  the 
kingdom,  which,  he  says,  was  the  "life  eternal"  of 
Matt.  XXV.;  and  hence  they  had  passed  the  judgment 
spoken  of  in  that  chapter.  But  have  I  not  quoted  pas- 
sage after  passage  from  the  Epistles  of  the  Apostles, 
[who,  he  says,  had  already  passed  his  judgment]  in 
which  they  speak  of  the  coming  of  Christ  in  judgment 
as  still  future?  Ceilainly  I  have.  The  passage  in  2 
Thessalonians,  for  instance.  Was  not  Paul  in  the  king- 
dom when  he  wrote  it.''  Was  not  the  kingdom  then 
already  set  up.''  Had  not  Christ,  accoixling  to  Mr. 
Manford,  already  passed  judgment  upon  Paul.?  Had 
not  Paul  already  gone  away  into  life  eternal,  if  my 
friend  is  right  when  he  says  it  means  "the  life  of  the 
Gospel,"  "life  in  the  kingdom  of  God".''  And  yet  the 
AjDOstle  says  in  that  Epistle :  "  Seeing  it  is  a  righteous 
thing  with  God  to  recompense  tribulation  to  them  that 
trouble  you;  and  to  you,  who  are  troubled,  rest  with  us, 
when  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with 
his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire  taking  vengeance  on 
them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  Gospel 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  who  shall  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord, 
and  from  the  glory  of  his  power;  when  he  shall  comQ 
to  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  and  to  be  admired  by  all 
them  that  believe  (because  our  testimony  among  you 
was  belie^'ed)  in  that  day."     2  Thes.   i.  6-10.      And, 


Judgment — Punishment.  349 

moreover,  the  gentleman  admitted  that  this  passage  refers 
to  the  same  time  and  matter  that  the  one  in  Matt.  xxv. 
does!  If  he  understands  himself,  I  do  not  understand 
him :  nor  do  I  beheve  his  hearers  do. 

It  is  not  enough,  however,  for  me  to  show  up  my 
opponent's  "  flounderings,"  inconsistencies,  and  self-con- 
tradictions. I  must  show  that  he  is  wrong  as  to  the 
judgment  of  Matt,  xxv.,  and  the  life  and  punishment 
that  are  to  follow  it.  He  says  that  that  Judgment  came 
when  the  kingdom  was  set  up  and  the  Gospel  was  first 
preached,  and  that  all  who  recei\'ed  the  Gospel,  went 
away  into  everlasting  life — that  is,  the  life  of  the  Gospel 
— while  those  who  rejected  it,  rertiained  in  moral  death, 
which  was  the  everlasting  punishment.  According  to 
this,  the  reason  why  some  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment  and  others  into  eternal  life  is  that  some 
receive  the  Gospel  when  it  is  preached  to  them,  and 
others  do  not.  Now,  I  grant  that  those  who  receive  the 
Gospel  when  it  is  preached  to  them  do  pass  from  death 
to  life,  from  condemnation  to  justification;  while  those 
who  reject  it  remain  in  death,  in  condemnation;  but  I 
deny  that  the  Savior  refers  to  this  matter  in  Matt.  xxv. 
What  he  describes  there  is  to  take  place  when  he  comes 
in  his  glory  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him ;  when  he 
shall  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory,  and  all  nations 
shall  be  gathered  before  him ;  when,  as  I  have  shown 
by  other  scriptures,  the  dead  shall  be  raised  and  shall 
stand  before  him.  And,  then,  what  is  to  be  the  reason 
why  some  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment 
and  others  into  life  eternal  >  This  is  an  important  point 
to  be  observed.  The  righteous  are  to  go  into  eternal 
.  life,  because  they  shall  have  done  something :  "  For  I  was 
hungry,  and  ye  gave  me  meat;  I  was  thirsty,  and  ye 


35^  Oral  Discussion. 

£  ave  me  drink ;  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye  fook  me  in ; 
naked,  and  ye  clothed  me;  I  xvas  sick,  and  ye  visited 
me;  I  was  in  prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me."  The 
righteous  will  tlien  inquire,  "Lord,  whcit  saw  we  thee" 
thus,  and  wlien  did  we  so  ?  And  the  King  will  answer, 
"  Inasmuch  as  ye  have  doite  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these 
my  brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me."  The  decision  of 
the  Judge  will  then  turn  upon  what  men  shall  have  done 
■previously  to  the  judgment  day.  The  righteous  will  go 
into  eternal  life,  because  of  what  they  shall  have  done; 
and  the  wicked  into  everlasting  punishment,  because  of 
what  they  shall  have  not  done.  Does  this  answer  to  my 
friend's  judgment  day  }  When  the  Gospel  was  preached 
at  Pentecost,  for  instance,  were  persons  invited  into  the 
life  of  the  Gospel  for  what  they  had  before  done  ?  Were 
persons  then  sentenced  to  punishment  for  what  they  had 
not  previously  done.''  Certainly  not.  It  mattered  not 
what  pei'sons  had  or  had  not  before  done,  when  the 
Gospel  was  preached  to  them,  they  then  alike  had  the 
privilege  of  entering  into  the  kingdom  and  partaking 
of  the  blessings  thereof,  without  reference  to  their  past 
deeds.  Had  this  not  been  the  case,  none  could  have 
entered  the  kingdom.  When  the  Gospel  was  preached, 
the  life  or  death,  the  salvation  or  condemnation,  of  men 
to  whom  it  was  preached,  depended  not  upon  what  they 
had  or  had  itot  done,  but  upon  what  they  xvould  or 
would  not  then  do.  This  will  not  be  the  case  in  the 
judgment  of  the  last  day — in  the  judgment  described  in 
Matt.  XXV.  Then  the  destinies  of  men  will  turn  upon 
what  is  past.  Then  they  will  be  judged  according  to 
the  deeds  done  in  the  body.  Does  any  one  ask  why  this 
will  be  so.''  I  answer,  because  the  Gospel  is  now 
preached,  and  all  are  called  upon  to  accept  the  Gospel, 


Judgment — -Punishment.  35 1 

and  to  come  into  the  kingdom  of  God's  dear  Son,  and 
live  a  life  of  obedience  to  its  laws — to  feed  the  hungry, 
give  drink  to  the  thirsty,  entertain  strangers,  clothe  the 
naked,  visit  the  sick,  and  all  in  the  name  of  the  Savior; 
because  God  hath  appointed  a  day  in  which  he  will 
judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  by  Jesus  Chi-ist.  "At 
that  day  "  men  will  receive  a  crown  of  righteousness  or 
not,  according  as  they  shall  have  lived,  or  not,  as  the 
Gospel  now  requires.  This  accords  with  the  Master's 
teaching  all  through  the  New  Testament.  Let  us  read 
one  or  two  passages :  "Then  said  he  also  to  him  that 
bade  him,  When  thou  makest  a  dinner  or  a  supper,  call 
not  thy  friends,  nor  thy  brethren,  neither  thy  kinsmen, 
nor  thy  rich  neighbors;  lest  they  also  bid  thee  again, 
and  a  recompense  be  made  thee.  But  when  thou  makest 
a  feast,  call  the  poor,  the  maimed,  the  lame,  the  blind ; 
and  thou  shalt  be  blessed :  for  they  cannot  recompense 
thee :  for  thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrection 
of  the  just."  Luke  xiv.  I3,  13,  14.  Also:  "Marvel 
not  at  this:  for  the  hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that 
are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come 
forth;  they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection 
of  life,  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrec- 
tion of  damnation."  John  v.  38,  29.  If,  as  I  have 
before  said,  all  this  is  not  future,  then,  my  friends,  the 
Bible  teaches  no  future.  But  it  is  future,  and  will  all 
come  to  pass.  Then  the  kingdom  will  be  delivered  up 
to  the  Great  Father,  and  he  will  be  all  in  all.  Then  the 
righteous  shall  "  inherit  the  kingdom  "  and  enjoy  it  for- 
ever, as  an  inheritance.  "  Blessed  be  the  God  and 
Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which,  according  to 
his  abundant  mercy,  hath  begotten  us  again  unto  a  lively 
hope  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead, 


353  Oral  Discussion. 

to  an  inheritance  incorruptible,  and  undefiled,  and  that 
fadeth  not  away,  i"escrved  in  heaven  for  you,  who  are 
kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  salvation, 
ready  to  be  revealed  in  the  last  time."  i  Peter  i.  3,  4,  5. 
The  gentleman  told  you  that  Paul  never  wrote  or 
spoke  a  Greek  word  that  is  rendered  hell  in  our  Bible 
but  once,  and  that  is  in  the  15th  of  Corinthians,  "and 
there  he  says  hell  shall  be  destroyed^  He  also  told  you 
in  that  connection  that,  "  At  the  resurrection,  then,  all 
rule,  authority  and  power,  death  and  hell,  are  to  be  de- 
stroyed." This  is  just  what  I  have  been  waiting  for  him 
to  say.  Mark  you  :  All  this  destroying  is  to  take  place 
'•'•at  the  resurrection^  I  believe  every  word  of  it;  and 
I  propose  to  help  him  to  establish  the  point  in  your 
minds.  And  to  do  this,  let  us  turn  and  read  it  all  in  one 
passage  of  scripture :  "  And  I  saw  a  great  white  throne, 
and  him  that  sat  on  it,  from  whose  face  the  earth  and 
the  heaven  fled  away;  and  there  was  found  no  place  for 
them.  And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand 
before  God;  and  the  books  were  opened:  and  another 
book  was  opened,  which  is  the  book  of  life:  and  the 
dead  were  judged  out  of  those  things  which  were  written 
in  the  books,  according  to  their  works.  And  the  sea 
gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it;  and  death  and  hell 
delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them :  and  they 
were  judged  every  man  according  to  their  works.  And 
death  and  hell  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.  This  is 
the  second  death.  A  nd  'whosoever  was  not  found  ivr it- 
ten  in  the  book  of  life  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire." 
Rev.  XX.  11-15.  Here  we  have  an  account  of  the  com- 
plete accomplishment  of  the  whole  matter.  Here  we 
have  the  resurrection;  and  "at  the  resurrection,"  as  my 
friend  very  coiTectly  told  you,  we  have  "death  and  hell" 


Judgment — Punishment.  353 

destroyed — the  same  hell  Paul  spoke  of  In  the  15th  of 
Corinthians.  Here,  also,  "  at  the  resurrection^''  we  have 
the  judgment,  and  punishment  of  the  wicked !  "  Who- 
soever was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,"  with  "  death  and  hell."  All 
go  together,  at  the  same  time — '•'•at  the  resurrection"  ! 
Wonder  how  the  gentleman  likes  to  have  my  assistance ! 
"  Hell "  seems  to  be  his  forte,  but  I  think  he  did  not 
excel  in  this  little  episode  on  "  hell."  He  must  try  it 
again.  He  can  better  afford  to  come  out  second  best  on 
any  other  question  than  on  "  hell."  His  reputation  will 
certainly  suffer  if  he  fails  even  once  on  the  "  hell "  ques- 
tion. 

Failing  at  eveiy  point  in  this  discussion,  the  gentle- 
man turns  aside  to  get  up  a  little  fun  over  a  sermon  I 
preached  in  Chicago  sometime  since,  on  "  Spiritism." 
Of  course,  he  watches  with  a  jealous  eye  everything 
that  is  said  about  '•'■Spiritism."  That  is  the  degree  next 
to  the  one  he  now  works  in — that  is,  if  he  has  not 
already  taken  that  degree  }  But  he  tells  you  I  said  Tar- 
tarus meant  our  atmosphere.  Did  he  show  you  that  I 
was  wrong.?  What  say  the  "Doctors,"  Mr.  Manford, 
on  this  question .''  Where  were  the  angels  that  sinned 
cast  down  to.^*  What  is  meant,  in  scripture,  by  "the 
prince  of  the  power  of  the  air"  .''  and  by  "wicked 
spirits  in  aerial  regions  }  "  What  were  the  demons  with 
which  the  Savior  is  said  to  have  come  in  contact  so  often 
while  in  the  world }  If  the  gentleman  will  answer  all 
these  questions  without  doing  any  violence  to  scripture 
teaching,  he  will  have  less  time  to  revel  in  infidel  scoffs 
ings  and  sportings  over  Bible  teaching.  But  he  thinks 
it  a  frightful  matter,  specially  for  balloonists,  that  I 
bring  Tartarus — one  "hell" — round  about  the  earth. 

30 


354  Oral  Discussion. 

But  he  brings  all  "hells"  upon  the  earth.  And  if  one 
hell,  brought  around  the  earth,  would  make  hell  forty- 
five  miles  deep,  how  deep  is  hell  according  to  his  view  ? 
There  are  three  hells  mentioned  in  scripture,  and  as 
he  brings  them  all  to  the  earth,  he  has  hell  about  one 
hundred  and  thirty-five  miles  deep ! 

But  he  proposes  to  name  one  hell  Sweeney  instead  of 
Tartarus^  but  what  will  he  name  that  one  over  in  the 
20th  of  Revelation,  wherein  "death  and  one  hell"  and 
somebody  else  are  to  be  destroyed  "  at  the  resurrection"  ? 
Shall  we  call  it  "  the  second  death  "  ?  or  shall  we  call  it 
Afanford?  But,  my  friends,  in  all  this  there  is  no 
argument.  We  have,  however,  to  answer  some  men 
according  to  their  folly.  Were  it  not  so,  I  should  have 
passed  by  all  that  was  said  about  Tartarus.  \Time  ex- 
pired. 


[mr.  manford's  fifth  reply.] 

According  to  the  gentleman's  own  statement,  when 
Jesus  said,  "  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  na- 
tions," he  simply  meant  the  nations  that  were  to  be  on 
earth  when  he  would  come — not  one  man,  woman  or 
child  who  would  live  or  die  before  that  event.  He 
expressly  admitted,  that  "  all  nations "  in  that  passage 
DO  NOT  MEAN  THE  DEAD.  He  read  it,  however,  in  the 
first  place  to  prove  that  Christ,  when  he  would  come, 
would  judge  all  mankind — all  of  Adam's  race,  from 
the  first  to  the  last — the  living  and  the  dead.  But  he 
has  been  driven  from  that  position,  and  now  he  admits, 
because  he  is  forced  to,  that  "  all  nations  "  do  not  mean 
THE  DEAD.     Truc,  he  said,  the  dead  will  be  there,  but 


Judgment — Punishment.  355 

he  admitted  tliat  "  all  nations  "  do  not  include  them. 
But"  mark  you,  Christ  did  not  say  the  dead^NOxiX^  be  there 
— only  "  all  nations."  I  will  read  the  passage :  "  When 
the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all  the 
holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne 
of  his  glory;  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  na- 
tions; and  he  shall  separate  them  one  from  another  as 
a  shepherd  divideth  his  sheep  from  the  goats."     Not  a 

WORD  ABOUT  THE  DEAD    BEING    THERE.       It  WaS  tO  be  a 

judgment  of  nations,  and  Mr.  Sweeney  admitted,  that 
"  all  nations  "  do  not  include  the  dead.  He  also  admit- 
ted, that  Christ  was  to   come  to  this  world  to  judge 

THESE  NATIONS. 

The  gentleman  is  right.  No  doubt  of  it.  This  noted 
passage,  then,  does  not  teach  the  judgment  he  is  trying  to 
establish — it  only  teaches  a  judgment  of  the  nations 
when  Christ  would  come.  Let  this  be  remembered. 
This  passage  is  the  key  to  all  those  passages  that  speak 
of  Christ  judging  men.  When  the  New  Testament 
says,  Chiist  would  "judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,"  that 
is,  believers  and  unbelievers,  as  St.  Paul  explains  (Eph. 
iii.  1-5;  Col.  ii.  13),  or,  as  Macknight  says,  "Jews  and 
Gentiles,"  it  means  the  righteous  and  the  wicked  of  the 
NATIONS,  or,  as  Christ  called  them,  the  sheep  and  the 
goats.  When  Paul  said,  "'He  hath  appointed  a 
day  in  which  he  will  judge  the  world"  he  meant 
the  nations  that  would  be  on  earth  when  he  would 
come,  would  be  judged.  None  of  these  scriptures  relate 
to  a  judgment  in  eternity — none  to  the  judgment  of  the 
departed.  They  all  speak  of  the  same  judgment  Matt. 
XXV.  does — a  judgment  of  nations.  The  gentleman  is 
left  without  any  evidence  of  his  judgment  day.  Hia 
<'  house  is  left  unto  him  desolate." 


356  Oral  Discussion. 

Our  friend  has  been  pushed  to  this  point.  When  I 
cited  the  gloiuous  Promise  that,  "All  nations  whom 
Thou  hast  made  shall  come  and  worship  before  thee, 

0  Lord,  and  glorify  thy  name,"  he  said  there  was  no 
reference  to  the  dead  there;  and  he  had  not  brass  enough 
in  his  face  to  say  to  this  congregation,  that  "  all  nations" 
inean  mone  than  "  all  nations  whom  Thou  hast 
MADE."  Simply  "all  nations"  may  mean  all  nations  of 
a  given  period,  or  a  given  portion  of  the  earth,  but  "  all 
nations  whom  Thou  hast  made"  surely  mean  all  man- 
kind.    It  can  mean  nothing  less. 

A  prophet  speaks  of  a  judgment  of  the  nations : 

*'  Behold  the  day  of  the  Lord  cometh,  and  thy  spoil 
shall  be  divided  in  the  midst  of  thee.  And  I  will  gather 
ALL  NATIONS  AGAINST  JERUSALEM  to  battle;  and  the 
city  shall  be  taken,  and  the  houses  rifled;  and  half  of 
the  cjty  shall  go  into  captivity,  and  the  residue  of  the 
people  shall  not  be  cut  off  from  the  city."  Zach. 
xiv.  I,  2. 

This  is  a  judgment  of  the  natio7ts.  The  time  of  the 
judgment  is  called  "  the  day  of  the  Lord."  The  Lord 
would  come  and  execute  this  judgment.  The  prophet 
also  speaks  of  a  division  of  the  judged.  And  this  judg- 
ment was  to  commence  at  Jerusalem.  Is  it  not  the 
same  day.,  the  same  coming  of  the  Lord.,  the  same  judg- 
ment of  the  nations,  spoken  of  in  Matt,  xxv?  Without 
doubt,  this  judgment  of  the  nations  Jesus  speaks  of,  is 
the  same  of  which  the  prophets  so  often  write.  I  have 
given  you  their  testimony  in  a  previous  speech,  to  which 

1  refer  you. 

As  the  judgment  was  to  be  of  the  nations,  and  on  the 
earth.,  therefore  the  separations.,  and  the  punishment 
also,  were  to  be  on  earth.     We  all  know  there  is  now  a 


Judgment — Punishment.  357 

moral  separation  of  mankind.  Tiie  pure  and  the  right- 
eons  are  "  in  heavenly  places  in  Christ  Jesus,"  while  the 
impure  and  vicious  are  debased  and  degraded.  The  one 
are  in  possession  of  spii'itual  life,  while  the  other  class  are 
in  a  state  of  death  and  destruction.  But  there  is  not  the 
outrageous  and  heart-rending  divisions  of  mankind  his 
creed  contemplates — shutting  up  some  in  hpaven,  and 
shutting  up  some  in  an  endless  hell  to  be  the  sport  of 
devils  eternally.  The  gentleman's  devil  could  not  divide 
mankind  worse  than  that.  And  will  the  glorified  Jesus 
do  as  bad  as  satan  could,  had  he  the  power.''  Away 
with  such  a  horrid  dogma!  It  is  worse  than  Atheism. 
As  John  Wesley  said,  "  I  had  rather  believe  in  no  God 
than  believe  him  to  be  an  almighty  tyrant." 

Concerning  the  word  everlasting,  he  said,  "  When  it 
is  applied  to  the  after-death  state  of  existence  it  covers 
the  whole  period  of  that  existence."  But  we  have  spen 
that,  according  to  our  friend's  own  admission,  it  is  not  so 
"  applied  "  in  the  passage  before  us.  That  speaks  of  a 
judgment  in  this  world,  a  judgment  of  the  nations,  and 
so,  according  to  his  own  showing,  the  punishment  is  in 
this  world — among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  I  will  read 
several  passages  whei^e  similar  language  occurs,  and  you 
will  see  at  once  that  men  can  suffer  on  earth  what  the 
Bible  calls  everlasting  punishment. 

"  Therefore  behold,  I,  even  I,  will  utterly  forget  you, 
and  I  will  forsake  you,  and  the  city  that  I  gave  you  and 
your  fathers,  and  cast  you  out  of  my  presence:  and  I 
will  bring  an  everlasting  reproach  upon  you,  and  a  per- 
petual shame,  which  shall  not  be  forgotten."    Jer.  xxiii. 

39.  40- 

This  "everlasting  reproach"  and  "shame"  is  thus 
explained :  ♦ 


358  Oral  Discussion. 

"Behold,  I  will  send  and  take  all  the  families  of 
the  north,  saith  the  Lord,  and  Nebuchadrezzar  the 
king  of  Babylon,  my  servant,  and  will  bring  them 
against  this  land,  and  against  the  inhabitants  thereof, 
and  against  all  these  nations  round  about,  and  will 
utterly  destroy  them,  and  make  them  an  astonishment, 
and  a  hissing,  and  perpetual  desolations.  Moreover 
I  will  take  from  them  the  voice  of  mirth,  and  the 
voice  of  gladness,  the  voice  of  the  bridegroom,  and  the 
voice  of  the  bride,  the  sound  of  the  millstones,  and  the 
light  of  the  candle.  And  this  whole  land  shall  be  a 
desolation,  and  an  astonishment;  and  these  nations  shall 
serve  the  king  of  Babylon  seventy  years.  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  when  seventy  years  are  accomplished,  that 
I  will  punish  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  that  nation,  saith 
the  Lord,  for  their  iniquity,  and  the  land  of  the  Chal- 
deans, and  will  make  it  perpetual  desolations."  Jer. 
XXV.  9-12. 

This  was  a  judgment  of  the  nations ;  it  was  temporal ; 
it  was  to  be  endured  on  earth.  Yet  it  is  called  "  ever- 
lasting." On  earth,  then,  men  can  suffer  everlasting 
punishment.     Another  passage : 

"Come  near,  ye  nations,  to  hear;  and  hearken,  ye 
people;  let  the  earth  hear,  and  all  that  is  therein; 
the  world,  and  all  things  that  come  forth  of  it.  For 
the  indignation  of  the  Lord  is  upon  ALL  NATIONS, 
and  his  fuiy  upon  all  their  armies;  he  hath  utterly  de- 
stroyed them,  he  hath  delivered  them  to  the  slaughter. 
Their  slain  also  shall  be  cast  out,  and  their  stink  shall 
come  up  out  of  their  carcasses,  and  the  mountains 
shall  be  melted  with  their  blood.  And  all  the  host 
of  heaven  shall  be  dissolved,  and  the  heavens  shall  be 
rolled  together  as  a  scroll :  and  all  their  host  shall  fall 
down,  as  the  leaf  falleth  off  from  the  vine,  and  as  a  fall- 
ing fig  from  the  fig-tree."     Isa.  xxxiv.  1-4. 

Here  is  a  judgment  of  "  all  nations  "  again ;  and 
when  it  should  take  place,  "  all  the  hosts  of  heaven  shall 


ytidgment — Punishment.  -rxc^ 

be  dissolved,  and  the  heavens  shall  be  rolled  together  as 
a  scroll,"  etc.,  w^ords  much  like  Matt,  xxiv.,  and  3  Peter 
iii.,  which  the  gentleman  refers  to  the  destruction  of  the 
universe;  but  mark,  how  the  next  words  explain  this 
language : 

"  For  my  sword  shall  be  bathed  in  heaven :  behold, 
it  shall  come  down  upon  IDUMEA,  and  upon  the 
people  of  my  curse,  to  judgment.  The  sword  of  the 
Lord  is  filled  with  blood ;  it  is  made  fat  with  fatness, 
and  with  the  blood  of  lambs  and  goats,  with  the  fat  of  the 
kidneys  of  rams :  for  the  Lord  hath  a  sacrifice  in  BOZ- 
RAH,  and  a  great  slaughter  in  the  land  of  IDUMEA. 
And  the  unicorns  shall  come  down  with  them,  and 
the  bullocks  with  the  bulls;  and  their  land  shall  be 
soaked  with  blood,  and  their  dust  made  fat  vrith  fatness. 
For  it  is  the  DAY  of  the  Lord's  vengeance,  and  the 
year  of  recompenses  for  the  controversy  of  Zion.  And 
the  streams  thereof  shall  be  turned  into  pitch,  and  the 
dust  thereof  into  brimstone,  and  the  land  thereof  shall 
become  burning  pitch.  It  shall  not  be  quenched  night 
nor  day ;  the  smoke  thereof  shall  go  up  forever  :  from 
generation  to  generation  it  shall  lie  waste:  none  shall 
pass  through  it  forever  and  ever.  The  corynorant  and 
the  <^///f?r«  shall  possess  it;  the  otf/ also  and  the  raven 
shall  dwell  in  it:  and  he  shall  stretch  out  upon  it  the 
line  of  confusion,  and  the  stones  of  emptiness.  They 
shall  call  the  nobles  thereof  to  the  kirigdom,  but  none 
shall  be  there,  and  all  her  frinces  shall  be  nothing. 
And  thorns  shall  come  up  in  her  palaces^  nettles  and 
brambles  in  the  fortresses  thereof;  and  it  shall  be  a 
habitation  of  dragons^  and  a  court  for  o-wls.  The  wild 
beasts  of  the  desert  shall  also  meet  with  the  wild  beasts 
of  the  island^  and  the  satyr  shall  cry  to  his  fellow;  the 
screech-oxvl  also  shall  rest  there,  and  find  for  herself  a 
place  of  rest.  There  shall  the  great  owl  make  her  nest, 
and  lay,  and  hatch,  and  gather  under  her  shadow;  there 
shall  the  vultures  also  be  gathered,  ever^'  one  with  her 
mate." 


360  Oral  Discussion. 

If  the  prophet  had  not  said,  that  all  this  referred  to  a 
judgment  in  Idumea  and  Bozrah,  and  if  several  of  the 
verses  had  been  left  out,  what  a  splendid  passage  it 
would  be  for  the  gentleman  to  prove  his  day  of  judg- 
ment by  at  the  end  of  time !  He  would  have  said,  tri- 
umphantly, here  the  prophet  speaks — i,  Of  a  judgment 
of  ALL  nations;  2,  Of  the  destruction  of  the  starry 
heavens;  3,  Of  the  day  of  the  Lord's  vengeance;  4,  Of 
punishment  forever;  5,  Of  unquenchable  fire.  And  he 
would  have  wound  up  by  insinuating  that  I  was  a 
skeptic,  because  I  dissented  from  his  notion,  as  he  often 
does.  But  the  passage  tells  where  this  judgment  of  "  all 
nations"  was  to  be  located.  It  was  to  be  in  this  world — 
in  Idumea.  And  the  fire  that  was  not  to  be  quenched, 
and  the  smoke  that  ivas  to  go  up  forever,  relate  to  tem- 
poral calamities.  The  "  everlasting  punishment,"  and 
"  everlasting  destruction,"  in  the  gentleman's  proof-texts, 
also  relate  to  temporal  judgments.  These  passages  ex- 
plain them.     The  Bible  explains  itself. 

Everlasting,  then,  does  not  mean  endless  when  applied 
to  punishment.  It  means  endless  when  applied  to  God 
and  immortal  existence,  because  God  is  endless,  and  an 
immortal  existence  is  endless.  Nothing  is  endless  save 
what  proceeds  from  God,  Sin  is  the  work  of  man,  and 
so  punishment,  its  result,  we  bring  on  ourselves.  They 
are  both  of  the  earth,  and  earthy,  and  consequently 
will  end.  But  virture  and  immortality  ai'e  of  heaven, 
and  ai'e,  therefore,  endless. 

The  Greek  word,  kolasis,  rendered  punishment,  in  the 
passage,  "  These  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punish- 
ment," clearly  indicates  that  everlasting  does  not  mean 
endless  when  applied  to  that  word.  It  signifies  correc- 
tion, chastisement.    Greenfield  defines  it,  "  chastisement, 


Judgment — Punishment.  361 

punishment."  Hedricus,  in  his  Greek  Lexicon,  says, 
that  "The  trimming  of  the  luxurious  branches  of  a  tree 
or  vine,  to  improve  it  and  make  it  fruitful,"  in  the  Greek 
h  C3.\\e.(\  kolasis^  or  pztnishmcni.  Donnegan  says,  "The 
act  of  clipping  or  pruning — restriction,  restraint,  reproof, 
check,  chastisement."  The  learned  Grotius  says,  "  The 
kind  of  punishment  which  tends  to  the  improvement  of 
the  criminal  is  what  the  Greek  philosophers  called  kol- 
asLS^  or  chastisement.  Liddell's  Lexicon  defines  it, 
"  Pruning,  checking,  punishment,  chastisement,  correc- 
tion." Max  Miller,  the  most  learned  thinker  of  this 
century,  says,  that  the  primary  idea  of  the  word  is  to 
cleanse^  io  purify.     These  are  his  words: 

"  Do  we  want  to  know  what  was  uppermost  in  the 
minds  of  those  who  formed  the  -word  for  pHnishment, 
the  Latin  pcena  or  punio.,  to  punish,  the  root  ^^^,  in 
Sanscrit,  which  means  to  cleanse^  to  purify .^  tells  us  that 
the  Latin  derivation  was  originally  formed,  not  to  ex- 
press mere  striking  or  torture,  but  cleansing.,  correcting^ 
delivering  from  the  stain  of  sin." 

The  statements  and  definitions  of  all  these  learned 
authors  and  lexicographers  exactly  correspond  with  the 
Bible  idea  of  punishment.  This  would  be  a  correct 
rendering  of  the  passage  before  us — These  shall  go  away 
into  everlasting  correction,  or  chastisement.  They  were 
to  be  punished  for  their  correction,  improvement,  to 
cleanse  them  from  sin.  Punishment  is  a  means  to  a 
good  end.  As  this  is  so,  of  course  punishment  is  not 
ENDLESS.  It  would  be  a  contradiction  in  terms  to  say 
"  endless  correction,"  "  endless  chastisement,"  hence  the 
word  everlasting  does  not  mean  endless  when  applied 
to  punishment. 

The  truth  is,  divine  punishment  is  reformatory  in  its 


/ 


362  Oral  Discussion. 

tendency,  and  is  one  means  by  which  the  Lord  is  re- 
deeming' humanity.  This  the  Bible  clearly  teaches.  I 
will  read  some  of  its  testimony. 

"And  he  shall  judge  among  the  nations,  and  shall 
rebuke  many  people."  [This  judgment  of  the  "  nations" 
is  the  same  judgment  of  the  nations  spoken  of  in  Matt. 
XXV.  33  :  "And  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  nations." 
Now,  observe  the  result  of  this  judgment.]  "And  they 
shall  beat  their  swords  into  plough-shares,  and  their 
spears  into  pruning-hooks :  nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword 
against  nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more." 
Isa.  ii.  4. 

The  judgment  is  on  earth,  and  the  result  Is  peace  and 
happiness — not  eternal  strife  and  wretchedness  in  hell. 

"  When  the  Lord  shall  have  washed  away  the  filth  of 
the  daughters  of  Zion,  and  shall  have  purged  the  blood 
from  Jerusalem  from  the  midst  tliereof  by  the  spirit  of 
judgment.,  and  by  the  spirit  of  burning.^''     Isa.  iv.  4. 

"Judgment"  and  "burning"  were  to  purify  the  peo- 
ple—  not  damn  them  and  burn  them  eternally,  as  Mr. 
Sweeney  asserts. 

"With  my  soul  have  I  desired  thee  in  the  night;  yea, 
with  my  spirit  within  me  will  I  seek  thee  early :  for 
when  thy  judgments  are  in  the  earth,  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  world  will  learn  righteousness."  Isa. 
xxvi.  9. 

A  clear  statement  that  divine  punishment  leads  to 
righteousness,  and  consequently  is  not  endless. 

"  From  the  sole  of  the  foot  even  unto  the  head  there 
is  no  soundness  in  them;  but  wounds,  and  bruises,  and 
putrlfying  sores."     Isa.  I.  6. 

Mr.  S.  would  say,  "  They  are  clean  past  redemption, 


yudgmcnt — Punishment.  363 

and  the  sentence  should  be  passed,  Depart  into  endless 
torment — Let  him  that  is  filthy,  be  filthy  through  the 
ceaseless  ages  of  eternity."  "  With  God  all  things 
ARE  POSSIBLE,"  and  hence  the  Lord  adds : 

"And  I  will  turn  my  hand  upon  thee,  [to  torment 
them   eternally?]  and   purely  purge    away  thy   dross, 

AND  TAKE  AWAY  THY  TIN.  Zion  shall  be  REDEEMED 
WITH  JUDGMENT." 

Here  we  learn  what  God  saves  and  what  he  destroys. 
He  saves  the  sinner^  but  destroyes  his  sins. 

"On  heaven's  door  these  lines  inscribed  : 
The  sinner  saved,  but  sin  is  damned. 
But  down  our  throats  this  lie  is  crammed  : 
Sin  is  saved,  the  sinner  damned." 

"And  the  Lord  shall  smite  Egypt:  he  shall  smite  and 
HEAL  it:  and  they  shall  return  even  to  the  Lord,  and 
he  shall  be  entreated  of  them,  and  shall  heal  them." 
Isa.  xix.  22. 

The  Lord,  then,  smites,  wounds,  to  heal ;  kills  to  make 
alive, — just  what  might  be  expected  of  our  Heavenly 
Father. 

*•  Pain  is  to  save  from  pain ;  all  punishmtnt 
To  make  for  peace,  and  death  to  save  from  death ; 
Great  Source  of  Good  above,  how  kind  to  all ! 
In  'vengeance  kind!  Pain,  Death,  Gehenna,  Save." 

From  the  mea7iing  of  the  word  punishment,  then,  and 
from  what  the  Bible  says  about  the  object  of  punishment, 
it  is  evident  that  punishment  cannot  be  endless  in  dura- 
tion, and  hence  everlasting  cannot  mean  endless  when 
applied  to  it. 

I  will  now  give  the  testimony  of  wise  and  good  men, 
that  everlasting  does  not  mean  endless.     The  well-known 


364  Oral  Discussion. 

scholar  and  author,  Dr.  Thomas  Dick,  in  one  of  his  let- 
ters, dated  Dundee,  Scotland,  February  13,  1849,  says: 

"The  terms  eternal,  everlastijtg^  etc.,  certainly  do  not 
of  themselves,  in  most  cases,  imply  duration  without 
end,  as  many  of  the  objects  to  which  such  epithets  are 
applied  are  acknowledged  to  be  limited  in  their  duration. 
\Vhen  I  consider  the  boundless  nature  of  Eternity,  and 
■when  I  consider  the  limited  duration  of  man,  I  can 
hardly  bring  myself  to  believe  that  the  sins  of  a  few 
fleeting  years  are  to  be  punished  throughout  a  duration 
that  has  no  end,  more  especially  when  it  is  declared, 
more  than  a  score  of  times,  that  '  the  mercy  of  God 
endureth  forever,'  and  that  '  his  tender  mercies  are  over 
all  his  works.'  If  his  mercy  endureth  forever,  it  appears 
scarcely  consistent  with  the  idea  that  punishment  will 
be  inflicted  throughout  unlimited  duration." 

Macknight  writes,  "I  must  be  so  candid  as  to  ac- 
knowledge that  the  use  of  the  terms  forever,  eternal, 
and  everlasting,  in  other  passages  of  Scripture,  show 
that  they  who  understand  them  in  a  limited  sense,  when 
applied  to  punishment,  put  no  forced  interpretation  upon 
them."  Truth  of  Gospel  History,  p.  28.  According 
to  Macknight,  in  asserting  that  everlasting  punishment 
does  not  mean  endless,  I  put  no  forced  interpretation  on 
the  Bible.  Olshausen,  the  great  German,  tells  us,  that 
the  "word  is  ambiguous,  and  cannot  be  relied  on  in  the 
argument  for  endless  punishment."  You  will  find  this 
in  his  commentary  on  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Rev.  John  Foster,  the  celebrated  Baptist  divine  and 
scholar,  says,  "  The  terms  do  not  necessarily  and  abso- 
lutely signify  an  interminable  duration." 

Schleusner,  in  his  Lexicon  of  the  New  Testament, 
defines  the  word  thus:  "Any  space  of  time,  whether 
longer  [or  shorter,  past,  present,  or  future,  to  be  deter- 


yudgment — Punishment.  365 

mined  by  the  person  or  thing  spoken  of,  and  the  scope 
of  the  subjects;  the  hfe  or  age  of  man;  any  space  in 
which  we  measure  human  life,  from  birth  to  death." 

Nothing  can  be  more  evident  than  that  everlasting 
punishment  docs  not  mean  endless  punishment. 

Mr.  S.  admits,  that  the  term  "endless  punishment" 
is  not  in  the  Book.  He  said  I  had  "  sung  the  song  that 
endless  woe,  endless  hell,  endless  damnation,"  were  not 
in  the  good  Book.  It  is  time  the  world  was  told,  that 
those  words  are  not  in  the  Bible.  You  see  them  in  the 
creeds,  in  the  hymn  books — in  Mr.  S.'s  hymn  book — in 
all  sorts  of  orthodox  books;  you  hear  them  in  sermons 
and  prayers  and  exhortations,  as  the  words  of  God ;  and 
it  is  time  such  stuff  was  branded  with  a  lie  all  over  it. 
They  slander  God,  and  defame  heaven.  He  does  nol 
deny,  that  the  Mormon  Bible  and  Brigham  Young  teach 
endless  damnation.  But  he  is  mean  enough  to  try  to 
class  me  and  my  brethren  with  certain  Spiritualists. 
Brigham  Young  and  the  Mormons,  generally,  with  end- 
less hell  in  their  creed,  practice  abominations  that  are  a 
disgrace  to  our  country,  a  disgrace  to  this  century.  What 
a  blessed  injluence  faith  in  aft  endless  hell  has  ! 

Our  opposing  friends  offer  this  argument  for  endless 
woe.  Dr.  Patton,  in  the  Advance,  a  paper  he  publishes 
in  Chicago,  has  lately  given  it  some  prominence.  "  The 
Pharisees  in  the  days  of  Christ  believed  in  endless  pun- 
ishment. Jesus  did  not  tell  them  it  was  an  error.  He 
rather  employed  the  same  terms,  when  speaking  of 
punishment,  they  did,  and  must  have  meant  the  same." 
There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Pharisees  believed  in  endless 
woe.  Josephus,  a  Pharisee  himself,  says  they  did ;  and 
that  is  all  the  truth  there  is  in  the  argument.  And,  by 
the  way,  the  life  and  character  of  the  Pharisees  are  an 


^66  Oral  Discussion. 

excellent  commentary  on  the  evil  influence  of  faith  in 
eternal  woe.  Why  did  not  the  good  doctor  make  a 
point  there  ? 

It  is  not  correct  that  Jesus  employed  the  same  terms 
the  Pharisees  did  when  speaking  of  punishment.  Jesus 
applied  aionios  to  punishment ;  but  the  Pharisees  applied 
aidios — two  different  words.  Josephus  gives  the  opinion 
of  the  Pharisees  in  these  words :  "  But  the  souls  of  the 
bad  are  allotted  to  an  eternal  {aidios)  jDrison,  and  pun» 
ished  with  eternal    {aidios)   retribution."     Now   Christ 

used    ANOTHER    WORD    TO    EXPRESS    THE    DURATION    OF 

PUNISHMENT.  He  said,  ^^ aionios  punishment,"  '•'•aionios 
damnation,"  and  Paul  said,  '•'■aionios  destruction,"  but 
NEVER,  NEVER  '•'•  aidios  punishment,"  "  aidios  destruc- 
tion," '•'•aidios  damnation."  Josephus  often  uses  the 
word  aionios^  the  same  word  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
apply  to  punishment.  He  writes  of  the  "everlasting 
{aionios)  name,"  that  the  patriarchs  left  behind  them; 
of  the  "  everlasting  {aionios)  glory"  of  the  Jewish  nations 
and  heroes;"  of  the  "everlasting  {aionios)  reputation  of 
Herod ;"  of  the  "  everlasting  {aionios)  worship "  in  the 
temple  of  Jerusalem ;  of  the  "  everlasting  {aionios)  im- 
prisonment" of  John.  This  is  the  same  word  that 
Christ  and  his  disciples  used  when  speaking  of  punish- 
ment. Josephus  did  not  mean  ejidless  by  it ;  neither  did 
they  mean  endless  by  it.  You  see,  then,  that  Christ  did 
NOT  apply  the  word  to  punishment  that  Mr.  Sweeney 
does,  nor  the  word  the  old  Pharisees  did.  That  is  a 
remarkable  fact,  and  proves  that  Jesus  did  not  mean 
endless  punishment,  when  he  spoke  of  aionios  punish- 
ment. He  did  not  use  the  word  the  Pharisees  did,  and 
he  did  not  mean  what  they  did. 

Christ  not  only  condemned  the  life  of  the  Pharisees, 


yudginent — Punishment.  367 

but  he  condeftzned  their  doctrine.  Said  he  to  his  dis- 
ciples, "  Take  heed  and  beware  of  the  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees,"  which  was  explained  to  mean 
"  the  doctrine  of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees."  Matt, 
xvi.  6,  12.  The  Sadducees  believed  that  God  would 
annihilate  men,  and  the  Pharisees  believed  he  would 
punish  them  endlessly^  which  is  still  worse;  but  Jesus 
condemned  both  doctrines,  and  told  his  disciples  to 
*'  BEWARE  "  of  both.  And  I  would  kindly  say  to 
friend,  "To  beware  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Phari- 
sees"  OF  ENDLESS  PUNISHMENT. 

What!  did  Jesus  Christ  believe  and  preach  that  mil- 
lions, made  in  the  image  of  God,  would  be  damned  by 
that  God  whose  very  name  is  Love,  to  all  eternity! 
What!  did  Jesus  Christ  believe  and  preach  that  millions 
of  the  precious  souls,  for  whom  he  was  about  to  die, 
would  be  cursed  by  his  God,  cursed  by  himself,  end- 
lessly! I  would  sooner  expect  to  see  it  proved  that 
Franklin  taught  prodigality ;  Washington,  tyranny; 
Howard,  cruelty;  Newton,  ignorance,  and  Wesley, 
7?iaterialism. 

The  brother  has  tried  to  prove  that  Jesus  taught  end- 
less punishment,  because  he  spoke  of  Gehettna.,  a  word 
translated  hell.  We  all  know  what  that  word  literally 
means.  It  was  the  name  of  a  valley  near  Jerusalem, 
called  "  The  valley  of  the  sons  of  Hinnom."  Gehenna 
is  its  name  in  the  Greek  language.  On  the  words  of 
our  Lord,  (Matt.  v.  22)  "Shall  be  in  danger  of  hell 
^xq" {Gehemia—fire)  Dr.  Clarke  comments  thus: 

"  Our  Lord  here  alludes  to  the  valley  of  the  sons  of 
Hinnom.  This  place  was  near  Jerusalem.  It  is  prob- 
able Jesus  means  no  more  than  this: — if  a  man  charge 
another  with  apostasy  from  the  Jewish  religion,  a  rebel- 


368  Oral  Discussion. 

lion  against  God,  and  cannot  prove  his  charge,  then  he 
is  exposed  to  that  punishment  (burning  aHve)  which  the 
other  must  liave  suftered  if  the  charge  had  been  substan- 
tiated." 

Parkhurst,  in  his  Greek  Lexicon,  says: 

"A  Gehenna  of Jire^  in  its  outward  and  primary  sense, 
relates  to  that  dreadful  doom  of  being  burned  alive  in  the 
valley  of  Hinnom." 

It  is  said,  that  the  Jews,  in  the  days  of  Christ,  designat- 
ed their  place  of  endless  torment  by  the  word  Gehenna. 
But  this  is  all  assumption — there  is  not  a  particle  of 
evidence  of  its  truth.  No  one  pretends  that  the  Old 
Testament  uses  the  word  in  that  sense.  Neither  Philo 
nor  Josephus,  both  Jewish  writers  in  the  first  century, 
use  the  word  in  that  sense.  We  have  seen  that  literally 
it  signified  a  valley  in  Judea;  \)n\.  figuratively  it  meant 
the  temporal  calamity  that  was  to  come  on  the  Jewish 
nation  in  the  generation  in  which  our  Lord  lived,  when 
Jesus  said,  "  Then  shall  be  great  tribulation,  such  as  was 
not  since  the  beginning  of  the  world  to  this  time,  no, 
nor  ever  shall  be."  Matt.  xxiv.  3i.  It  is  used  literally 
in  the  following  passages : 

,/  "  And  the  border  went  up  by  the  valley  of  the 
SONS  OF  Hinnom  unto  the  south  side  of  the  Jebusite; 
the  same  is  Jerusalem :  and  the  border  went  up  to  the 
top  of  the  mountain  that  lieth  before  the  valley  of 
THE  sons  of  Hinnom  westward."    Josh.  xv.  8. 

"  And  Josiah  defiled  Topheth,  which  is  in  the  val- 
ley OF  THE  children  OF  HiNNOM."     2  Kings  xxiii.  lO. 

"Moreover  Ahaz  burnt  incense  in  the  valley  of 
THE  SONS  of  Hinnom,  and  burnt  his  children  in  the 
fire,  after  the  abomination  of  the  heathen."  2  Chron. 
xxviii.  3. 

"And  they  have  built   the   high  places  of  Tophet, 


Judgment — Punishmettt.  369 

which  is  in  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom,  to  burn 
their  sons  and  their  daughters  in  tlie  fire;  which  I  com- 
manded them  not,  neither  came  it  into  my  heart.  There- 
fore, behold,  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord,  tliat  it  shall 
no  more  be  called  Tophet,  nor  The  valley  of  the 
son  of  Hinnom,  but  The  valley  of  slaughter :  for  they 
shall  bury  in  Tophet,  till  there  be  no  place."    Jer.  vii. 

In  these  places  Gehenna  is  used  literally.     In  the  fol- 
lowing it  is  used  figuratively : 

"Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Go,  and  get  a  potter's  earthen 
bottle,  and  take  of  the  ancients  of  the  people,  and  of  the 
ancients  of  the  priests,  and  go  forth  unto  the  valley 
OF  THE  SON  OF  HiNNOM,  which  is  by  the  entry  of  the 
east  gate,  and  proclaim  there  the  words  that  I  shall  tell 
thee;  and  say,  Hear  ye  the  word  of  the  Lord,  O  kings 
of  Judah,  and  iithabitants  of  Jerusalem;  thus  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel,  Behold,  I  will  bring 
evil  upon  this  place,  the  which  whosoever  heareth,  his 
ears  shall  tingle.  Because  they  have  forsaken  me,  and 
have  esti"anged  this  place,  and  have  burnt  incense  in  it 
unto  other  gods,  whom  neither  they  nor  their  fathers  have 
known,  nor  the  kings  of  Judah,  and  have  filled  this 
place  with  the  blood  of  innocents;  they  have  built  also 
the  high  places  of  Baal,  to  burn  their  sons  with  fire  for 
burnt  offerings  unto  Baal,  which  I  commanded  not,  nor 
spake  it,  neither  came  it  into  my  mind;  therefore,  behold, 
the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord,  that  this  place  shall  no 
more  be  called  Tophet,  nor  The  valley  of  the  son  of 
Hinnom,  but  The  valley  of  slaughter.  And  I  will  make 
void  the  counsel  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem  in  this 
place;  and  I  will  cause  them  to  fall  by  the  sword  before 
their  enemies,  and  by  the  hands  of  them  that  seek  their 
lives;  and  their  carcasses  will  I  give  to  be  meat  for  the 
fowls  of  the  heaven,  and  for  the  beasts  of  the  earth. 
And  I  will  make  this  city  desolate,  and  an  hissing; 
every  one  that  passeth  thereby  shall  be  astonished  and 
hiss,  because  of  all  the  plagues  thereof.      And  I  will 

32 


37°  Oral  Discussion, 

cause  them  to  eat  the  flesh  of  their  sons,  and  the 
flesh  of  their  daughters,  and  they  shall  eat  every  one 
the  flesh  of  his  friend,  in  the  siege  and  straitness  where- 
with their  enemies,  and  they  that  seek  their  lives,  shall 
straiten  them.  Then  shalt  thou  break  the  bottle  in  the 
sight  of  the  men  that  go  with  thee,  and  shalt  say  unto 
them,  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  Even  so  will  I 
break  this  people,  and  this  city,  as  one  breaketh  a  pot- 
ter's vessel,  that  cannot  be  made  whole  again ;  and  they 
SHALL  BURY  THEM  IN  ToPHET,  till  there  be  no  place 
to  bury.  Thus  will  I  do  unto  this  place,  saith  the 
Lord,  and  to  the  inhabitants  thereof,  and  even  make 
THIS  CITY  AS  Topiiet:  and  the  houses  of  Jerusalem, 
and  the  houses  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  shall  be  defiled 
AS  THE  PLACE  OF  TopHET,  bccausc  of  all  the  houses 
upon  whose  roofs  they  have  burned  incense  unto  all  the 
hosts  of  heaven,  and  have  poured  out  drink  ofierings 
unto  other  gods.  Then  came  Jeremiah  from  Tophet, 
whither  the  Lord  had  sent  him  to  prophesy;  and  he 
stood  in  the  court  of  the  Lord's  house,  and  said  to  all 
the  people,  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of 
Israel,  Behold,  I  will  bring  upon  this  city,  and  upon  all 
her  towns,  all  the  evil  that  I  have  pronounced  against 
it;  because  they  have  hardened  their  necks,  that  they 
might  not  hear  my  words."     Jer.  xix. 

Christ,  when  he  spoke  of  Gehenna^  or  of  the  valley 
of  the  sons  of  Hinnom,  which  is  the  same  thing,  at- 
tached the  same  sense  to  it  that  the  prophets  did  befoi-e 
him.  He  either  meant  that  wretched  valley  near  the 
walls  of  Jcrualem,  or  the  calamities  that  were  soon  to 
come  on  his  nation ;  and  there  is  not  a  scrap  of  evidence 
in  the  Bible,  or  out  of  it,  that  Jesus  meant  the  endless 
torment  the  Pharisees  believed  in,  by  the  word. 

My  friend  has  often  complained,  that  I  exaggerate  the 
horrors  of  his  hell.  He  would  have  you  think  it  is  not  near 
so  wretched  a  place  as  I  represent.  He  has  an  object  in 
this;    he  well  knows,  that  when  endless  damnation  is 


Judgment — Punishment.  371 

presented  in  its  true  character  it  staggers  belief.  Did 
you  ever  hear  him ;  did  you  ever  hear  any  preacher  of 
endless  punishment,  tell  his  hearers,  save  on  an  occasion 
like  this,  that  the  hori'ors  of  an  endless  hell  can  be  exag- 
gerated? Do  not  preachers  of  that  stamp,  rather,  ex- 
haust the  English  language  in  depicting  the  v^^retchedness 
of  the  damned?  Allow  me  to  i-ead  from  one  of  Rev. 
Spurgeon's  sermons  about  the  wretchedness  of  hell,  as  a 
full  justification  of  all  I  have  said.  It  is  from  his  dis- 
course on  the  "  Resurrection  of  the  Dead : " 

"  There  is  real  fire  in  hell,  as  truly  as  you  have  now  a 
real  body — a  fire  exactly  like  that  we  hav^e  on  earth  in 
everything  except  this,  that  it  will  not  consume,  though 
it  will  torture  you.  You  have  seen  the  asbestos  lying  in 
the  fire  red  hot,  but  when  you  take  it  out  it  is  uncon- 
sumed.  So  your  body  will  be  prepared  by  God  in  such  a 
way  that  it  will  burn  forever  without  being  consumed. 
When  thou  diest  thy  soul  will  be  tormented  alone — that 
will  be  hell  for  it — but  at  the  day  of  judgment,  thy  body 
will  join  thy  soul  and  then  thou  wilt  have  twin  hells, 
thy  soul  sweating  drops  of  blood,  and  thy  body  suftused 
with  agony :  the  veins  becoming  a  road  for  the  feet  of 
pain  to  travel  on;  every  nerve  a  string  on  which  the 
devil  shall  forever  play  his  tune  of  Hell's  Unutterable 
Lament." 

According  to  the  gentleman's  own  hymn  book,  horrible 
as  this  is,  it  is  only  a  dim  painting  of  an  endless  hell. 
It  sings: 

"  Horrors  past  imagination 

Will  surprise  your  trembling  heart, 
When  you  hear  your  condemnation, 
Hence,  acursed  wretch,  depart ! 

Hence,  with  satan 
And  his  angels  have  your  part." 

Hell,  then,  is  more  than  the  most  active  and  fertile 


372  Oral  Discussion. 

mind  can  imagine.     A  few  more  choice  lines  from  this 
book: 

"Then  sink  into  the  vast  abyss, 

To   ENDLESS  RUIN    HUBl'd." 

"  There  is  a  death  whose  pang 
Outlasts  the  fleeting  breath  : 

O  what   ETERNAL   HORRORS   HANG 

Around  the  second  death." 

This  last  verse  is  deemed  so  good  it  is  repeated  in  two 
different  places.     Another  of  his  hymns  sings : 

"  Rushing  in  flaming  ruin  down." 

Do  not  again  charge  me  with  misrepresenting  your 
hell  while  you  sing  such  horrid  descriptions  of  it. 
Ladies  and  gentlemen,  make  hell  mild  a.?,  you  please; 
but  if  it  is  endless  in  duration,  its  horrors  are  past  imagin- 
ation. A  billion  of  years  is  only  one  second  of  eternity, 
and  so  would  be  only  one  second  of  an  endless  hell. 
Trjr  to  count  a  billion — 1,000,000,000,000 — which  is  a 
million  times  a  million.  This  is  quickly  spoken;  but  no 
man  can  count  it.  If  Adam  had  counted  200  in  a 
minute,  and  had  kept  counting  to  the  present  hour,  he 
would  not  have  counted  one  billion.  Counting  200 
a  minute,  would  be  12,000  an  hour,  288,000  a  day, 
105,120,000  a  year;  and  to  count  a  billion  would  require 
more  than  9,5 1 2  years.  What  a  vast  period,  then,  would 
be  one  billion  of  years!  What  a  vast  period  for  immor- 
tal souls  to  suffer!  And  after  one  billion,  they  must 
suffer  another  billion,  and  another,  and  ANOTHER, 
and  ANOTHER;  aye,  after  suffering  a  MILLION 
OF  BILLIONS  OF  TEARS,  be  no  nearer  the  end 
of  their  damnation,  than  when  they  commenced !  And 
all  this  for  the  sins  of  this  brief  life  !     Yes,  for  not 


Jtidgment — PunisJitnent.  373 

being  Immersed  in  water!!  My  God,  what  a  creed!  I 
could  not  believe  such  a  monstrosity  if  I  ivould;  and  I 
would  not  if  I  could.  And  this  fathomless,  boundless 
eternity  of  wretchedness  for  no  possible  good.  If  this  is 
all  so,  well  might  the  damned  cry  in  the  language  of 
Dr.  Young,  4  believer  in  endless  woe  himself: 

••  Father  of  Mercies  !  why  from  silent  earth 
Didst  thou  awake  and  cune  rrn  into  birth  ? 
Tear  me  frum  quiet,  ravish  me  from  night, 
And  make  a  thankless  present  of  thy  light  ? 
Push  into  being  a  reverse  of  thee, 
And  animate  a  clod  with  misery  ? 
The  beasts  are  happy  ;  they  come  forth  and  keep 
Short  watch  on  earth,  and  then  lie  down  to  sleep. 
****** 
But  our  dire  punishment,  forever  strong. 
Our  constitution,  too,  forever  young. 
Cursed  with  returns  of  vigor  still  the  same, 
Powerful  to  bear  and  satisfy  the  flame ; 
Still  to  be  caught,  and  still  to  be  pursued  ; 
To  perish  still,  and  still  to  be  renewed  ! 
And  this  my  Help,  my  God,  at  thy  decree ; 
Nature  is  changed,  and  hell  should  succor  me  ! 
And  canst  thou  then  look  down  from  perfect  bliss. 
And  see  me  plunging  in  this  dark  abyss? 
Calling  thee  Father,  in  a  sea  of  fire  ? 
Or  pouring  blasphemies  at  thy  desire  ? 
With  mortal's  anguish  wilt  thou  raise  thy  name  ? 
And  by  my  pangs  omnipotence  proclaim  ?  " 

I  repeat,  and   all   this  wretchedness   for  no   good  to 

EARTH,  HEAVEN  Or  HELL ;    tO  GoD,  ANGELS,  Or  SPIRITS ; 

but  only  to  gratify  a  fiendish  spirit,  that  even  the 
devil  of  the  gentleman's  creed  would  be  ashamed  of 

If  the  passages  in  the  Bible  that  our  friend  quotes,  and 
others   quote,   to  prove  endless   punishment,  do   really 


374  Oral  Discussion, 

mean  endless  misery^  no  tongue  can  tell,  and  no  mind 
can  conceive,  its  horrors.  He  I'ead  these  words  of  our 
Savior,  "  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting 
FIRE,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels."  Now,  if 
this  means,  what  the  gentleman  says  it  does  mean — that 
countless  millions  of  mankind  are  to  live  endlessly  in 
FIRE  with  DEVILS,  do  I  exaggerate,  can  anybody  ex- 
aggerate, the  horrors  of  such  a  hell .''  When  Jesus  speaks 
of  "the  FIRE  that  never  shall  be  quenched,"  of  being 
"  CAST  into  HELL  FIRE  where  the  worm  dieth  not,"  if 
he  means  a  "fire"  that  will  burn  endlessly,  and  a 
"  worm  "  that  will  eat  into  the  soul  eternally,  the  wretch- 
edness is  indeed  '•'•  past  imagination,"  as  the  gentleman's 
hymn  book  says.  If  when  John  writes  of  the  "  bottom- 
less    PIT,"     of     "  the    LAKE     OF    FIRE     BURNING    WITH 

BRIMSTONE,"  in  which  some  were  to  be  "  tormented 
day  and  night,  forever  and  ever,"  he  means  to  describe 
the  eternal  abiding  place  of  billions  of  our  race,  then,  I 
repeat,  it  is  awful  beyond  conception.  If  this  is  all  so, 
then  Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  Trapp's  account  of  hell  is  no 
exaggeration : 

"  Fire^  too,  must  make  thee  sensible  of  hell : 
With  everlasting  burnings  who  can  dwell? 
Tormenting  Tophet  is  ordained  long  since, 
E'en  for  the  king,  the  potentate,  the  prince. 
It  is  prepared :  'Tis  roomy,  vast,  and  wide, 
With  store  of  fuel  plenteously  supplied  : 
The  breath  of  God  makes  the  full  furnace  boil ; 
And,  like  a  stream  of  brimstone  fires  the  pile. 
Doomed  to  live  death,  and  never  to  expire, 
In  floods,  and  whirlwinds  of  tempestuous  fire, 
The  damned  shall  groan ;  fire  of  all  kinds  and  forms — 
In  rain,  and  hail,  in  hurricane  and  storms  ; 
Liquid  and  solid,  livid,  red  and  pale; 
A  flaming  mountain  here,  and  there  a  flaming  vale. 


Judgment — Pitnlshment.  35^5 

The  liquid  fire  makes  seas ;   the  solid  shores, 

Arch'd  o'er  with  flames  the  horrid  concave  roars. 

All  Hell  is  Fire — above,  beside,  below, 

Fires  in  hard  metallic  substance  glow, 

Or  spout  in  cataracts,  or  in  rivers  flow. 

In  bubbling  eddies  rolls  the  fiery  tide. 

And  sulphurous  surges  on  each  other  ride. 

The  hollow,  winding  vaults,  and  dens,  and  caves, 

Bellow  like  furnaces  with  flaming  waves. 

Pillars  of  flame  in  spiral  volumes  rise, 

Like  fiery  snakes,  and  lick  the  infernal  skies. 

Sulphur,  the  eternal  fuel,  unconsumed. 

Vomits  redounding  smoke,  thick,  unillumed." 

These  passages  from  Jesus  and  John,  I  have  read,  are 
plain  to  me — not  at  all  in  the  way  of  my  faith  in  the 
redemption  of  humanity.  They  relate  to  temporal 
calamities  coming  on  nations  and  people.  The  Bible  so 
explains  them.  Read  the  following  terrific  description 
of  the  judgments  of  old  Jerusalem : 

"  But  if  ye  will  not  hearken  unto  me  to  hallow  the 
sabbath  day,  and  not  to  bear  a  burden,  even  entering  in 
at  the  gates  of  Jerusalem  on  the  sabbath  day;  then  will 
I  kindle  a  fire  in  the  gates  thereof,  and  it  shall  devour 
the  palaces  of  Jerusalem,  and  it  shall  not  be  quenched." 
Jer.  xvii.  27. 

"  Moreover  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  me,  say- 
ing, Son  of  man,  set  thy  face  toward  the  south,  and 
drop  thy  word  toward  the  south,  and  prophesy  against 
the  forest  of  the  south  field ;  and  say  to  the  forest  of  the 
south,  Hear  the  word  of  the  Lord;  Thus  saith  the  Lord 
God;  Behold,  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  thee,  and  it  shall 
devour  every  green  tree  in  thee,  and  every  dry  tree :  the 
flaming  flame  shall  not  be  quenched,  and  all  faces  from 
the  south  to  the  north  shall  be  burned  therein.  And  all 
flesh  shall  see  that  I  the  Lord  have  kindled  it :  it  shall 
not  be  quenched."     Eze.  xx.  45-48. 

"  And  I  will  pour  out  mine  indignation  upon  thee,  I 


37^  Oral  Discussion. 

will  blow  against  thee  in  the  fire  of  my  wrath,  and  de- 
liver thee  into  the  hand  of  brutish  men,  and  skillful  to 
destroy.  Thou  shalt  be  for  fuel  to  the  fire;  thy  blood 
shall  be  in  the  midst  of  the  land ;  thou  shalt  be  no  more 
remembered :  for  I  the  Lord  have  spoken  it."     Eze.  xxi. 

31.32. 

"And  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  me,  saying, 
Son  of  man,  the  house  of  Israel  is  to  me  become  dross: 
all  they  are  brass,  and  tin,  and  ii'on,  and  lead,  in  the 
midst  of  the  furnace;  they  are  even  the  dross  of  silver. 
Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  Because  ye  are  all 
become  dross,  behold,  therefore  I  will  gather  you  into 
the  midst  of  Jerusalem.  As  they  gather  silver,  and 
brass,  and  iron,  and  lead,  and  tin,  into  the  midst  of  the 
furnace,  to  blow  the  fire  upon  it,  to  melt  it;  so  will  I 
gather  you  in  mine  anger  and  in  my  fury,  and  I  will 
leave  you  there,  and  melt  you.  Yea,  I  will  gather  you, 
and  blow  upon  you  in  the  fire  of  my  wrath,  and  je  shall 
be  melted  in  the  midst  thereof.  As  silver  is  melted  in 
the  midst  of  the  furnace,  so  shall  ye  be  melted  in  the 
midst  thereof;  and  ye  shall  know  that  I  the  Lord  have 
poured  out  my  fury  upon  you."     Eze.  xxii.  17-22. 

All  this  is  explained  to  mean  the  desolation  that 
was  to  befall  the  Jews,  when  in  captivity  in  Babylon, 
hence  the  prophet  says : 

"And  the  whole  land  shall  be  desolate,  and  an 
astonishment;  and  these  nations  shall  serve  the  king  of 
Babylon  seventy  years.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
when  seventy  years  are  accomplished,  that  I  will  punish 
the  king  of  Babylon,  and  that  nation,  saith  the  Lord, 
for  their  iniquity,  and  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans,  and 
will  make  it  perpetual  desolations.  And  I  will  bring 
upon  that  land  all  my  words  which  I  have  pronounced 
against  it,  even  all  that  is  written  in  this  book,  which 
Jeremiah  hath  prophesied  against  all  the  nations."  Jer. 
XXV.  11-13- 

All  these  punishments  were  for  a  benevolent  purpose, 


Jicdgment — Punishment.  377 

hence  the  prophet  adds,  "I  will  CONSUME  THE 
FILTH  OUT  OF  THEM."  Eze.  xxii.  15.  This 
reminds  me  of  a  passage  from  Origen,  who  lived  in  the 
third  century,  and  was  a  believer  in  the  salvation  of  all 
men : 

"  The  sacred  Scriptures,"  said  he,  "  does,  indeed,  call 
'  our  God  a  consuming  fire,'  (Deut.  iv.  34,)  and  says  that 
'  rivers  of  fire  go  before  his  face,'  (Dan.  vii.  10,)  and 
that  '  he  shall  come  as  a  refiner's  fire,  and  purify  the 
people,'  (Mai.  iii.  2.)  As,  therefore,  God  is  a  consuming 
fire,  what  is  it  that  is  to  be  consumed  by  him.?  We  say 
it  is  -wickedness^  and  whatever  proceeds  from  it,  such  as 
is  figuratively  called  '  wood,  hay,  and  stubble,'  (i  Cor. 
iii.)  which  denote  the  evil  works  of  7na7t.  Our  God  is  a 
consuming  fire  in  this  sense ;  and  he  shall  come  as  a  re- 
finer's fire  to  purify  rational  nature  from  the  alloy  of 
wickedness  and  other  impure  matter  which  has  adulter- 
ated the  intellectual  gold  and  silver;  consuming  what- 
ever of  evil  is  admixed  in  all  the  soul." 

The  gentleman  said  I  garbled  his  printed  sermon, 
Webster's  dictionary,  and  the  productions  of  his  brethren 
I  read  from.  Now,  let  him  prove  it.  I  demand  the 
PROOF.  Here  are  the  books,  magazines,  and  papers  I 
read  fronl.  Now,  sir,  prove  your  charge  or  take  it  back. 
He  has  charged  me  several  times  with  misrepresenting 
A.Campbell;  but  he  has  \\q.yqx  attempted  to  prove  it. 
I  can  prove  he  has  misrepresented  Campbell,  and 
will  do  it  if  it  is  denied.  The  Methodists  do  not  indorse 
Dr.  Clarke!  Their  Conferences  and  Book  Concerns 
publish  his  Works.  Is  not  that  a  good  indorsement? 
I  quote  from  authors  for  the  same  reason  he  did — to  get 
the  meaning  of  words.  He  did  right^  but  I  did  wrong  I 
My  authors  condemn  his  definitions.  That  is  what  is 
the  matter. 

33 


378  Oral  Discussion. 

The  gentleman's  comments  on  the  following  is  a  curi- 
osity : 

"And  then  shall  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in 
a  cloud,  with  power  and  great  glory.  And  when  these 
things  begin  to  come  to  pass,  then  look  up,  and  lift  up 
YOUR  heads;  for  YOUR  redemption  draweth  nigh. 
And  he  spake  to  them  a  parable;  Behold  the  fig-tree, 
and  all  the  trees;  Avhen  they  now  shoot  forth,  YE  see 
and  know  of  YOUR  own  selves  that  summer  is  now 
NIGH  AT  HAND.  So  likewise  YE,  when  YE  see 
these  things  come  to  pass,  know  YE  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  nigh  at  hand.  Verily,  I  say  unto  YOU, 
This  generation  shall  not  pass  away,  till  all  be  fulfilled." 
Luke  xxi.  27-32. 

1.  Notwithstanding  Jesus  said,  all  this  would  take 
place  in  the  generation  in  which  he  lived,  nearly  two 
thousand  years  ago,  the  gentleman,  in  defiance  of  Christ's 
words,  in  defiance  of  the  meaning  of  the  terms  "  this 
generation,"  and  in  defiance  of  learned  authority  gen- 
erally, stands  up  here  and  tells  you  it  relates  to  events 
far  in  the  future ! 

2.  Although    Christ   told    the    disciples    that   they 

SHOULD    SEE    ALL    THESE    THINGS    COME    TO    PASS,    the 

gentleman  will  have  it  that  it  was  all  a  hoax  —  that 
they  would  die  thousands  of  years  before  those  things 
would  come  to  pass !  He  will  have  it,  too,  that  by  ye^ 
you^  your^  he  did  not  mean  the  persons  he  was  talking 
to,  but  somebody  that  might  be  on  earth  thousands  of 
years  after  1 1  That  caps  the  climax.  If  a  man  should 
ask  me  the  way  to  the  court-house  of  this  town,  and  I 
should  reply,  "  Tou  go  to  this  street  and  that  street;  you 
turn  to  your  right,  and  then  to  your  left,  and  then  you 
will  be  there,"  if  some  one  should  understand  me,  hy  you 
and  your^  to  mean  somebody  that  might  live  on  earth  ten 


Judgtnent — Punishment.  379 

thousand  years  hence,  would  you  not  conclude  there  was 
a  fool  or  an  msane  man  somewhere?  Let  us  tiy  to 
exercise  some  common  sense  in  reading  the  Bible. 

3.  Jesus  said,  "  And  when  these  things  begin  to  come 
to  pass,  then  look  up,  and  lift  up  your  heads ;  for  your 
redemption  draweth  nigh."  The  brother  thinks,  that 
the  redemption  which  was  nigh  nearly  two  thousand 
years  ago  has  not  been  realized  yet,  and  Jesus  knew 
when  he  told  them  this,  that  it  would  not  be  realized  till 
^after  the  disciples  had  been  in  heaven  several  thousand 
years !  What  redemption  would  be  nigh  to  them  in  hea- 
ven ?  What  evil  will  the  disciples  be  redeemed  from 
at  the  resurrection }  Mark,  they  were  to  be  redeemed 
from  some  evil.  The  gentleman's  theology  tells  us,  that 
all  go  to  heaven  or  hell  at  death,  without  being  judged. 
And  it  must  be,  the  brother  thinks,  the  disciples,  through 
mistake,  went  to  the  wrong  place  at  death ;  and  at  the 
"judgment  day"  he  talks  about  they  will  be  redeemed. 
Well,  that  would  be  a  redemption.  They  would  be 
likely  to  "lift  up  their  heads"  in  view  of  such  a  redemp- 
tion. The  "redemption"  spoken  of  in  Rom.  viii.,  the 
gentleman  referred  to.  Christians  on  earth — not  in  hell 
or  heaven — are  "  waiting /or."  He  had  better  read 
that  passage  again. 

The  truth  is,  the  redemption  promised  the  disciples, 
was  from  the  "  tribulation  "  spoken  of  from  the  fifth  to 
the  twenty-second  verses,  which  the  gentleman  admits 
came  on  the  people  of  that  age.  "  Then  shall  be  great 
tribulations,  "  etc.,  said  Jesus.  The  disciples  would  be 
delivered.,  redeemed  from  them. 

The  gentleman  cannot  understand  how  Christ's  coin- 
ing, his  kingdom  and  judgment,  could  be  spoken  of  as 
present  by  the  apostles,  and  yet  also  referred  to  as  future 


^a  Oral  Discussion. 

events.  There  is  no  difficulty.  Jesus,  when  on  eartli, 
said,  "the  kingdom  is  ivithin you"  "  is  come  unto  you," 
men  "  are  pressing  into  it,"  yet,  at  the  same  time,  he 
spoke  of  it  as  -a  future  institution.  The  disciples  did  the 
same.  They  were  "  translated  into  the  kingdom."  "  But 
ye  ARE  COME  unto  Mount  Sion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the 
living  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,"  etc.  Heb.  xii.  32. 
At  the  same  time  they  spoke  of  that  city  as  yet  to  come. 
"  And  I  John  saw  the  holy  city,  new  Jerusalem,  coming 
down  from  God  out  of  heaven,  prepared  as  a  bride 
adorned  for  her  husband.  And  he  carried  me  away 
in  the  spirit  to  a  great  and  high  mountain,  and  shewed 
me  that  great  city,  the  holy  Jerusalem,  descending  out 
of  heaven  from  God."     Rev.  xxi.  2,  10. 

This  is  the  explanation :  The  kingdom  of  God  was  es- 
tablished in  the  hearts  of  many  during  our  Lord's  personal 
ministry,  but  it  was  to  be  more  and  more  developed  and 
extended  in  after  years^  hence  it  is  spoken  of  as  coming. 
It  was  extended  and  developed  at  Pentecost  when  three 
thousand  were  born  into  it  in  one  day ;  it  was  extended 
still  more  in  the  world  when  the  Gentiles  gladly  received 
the  Gospel ;  and  still  more  when  the  power  of  the  Jew- 
ish nation  was  annihilated,  and  the  Jews  could  no  longer 
retard  its  progress.  In  later  ages  the  kingdom  has  come 
to  many  hearts  and  many  lands,  and  it  will  continue  to 
be  extended  further  and  further  till  the  kingdoms  of  this 
world  shall  be  governed  by  that  spiritual  kingdom  which 
is  "righteousness,  joy  and  peace  in  the  Holy  Spirit." 

Christ's  coming  to  bless  the  world  with  "  grace  and 
truth"  was  a  glorious  coming,  hence  the  heavenly  mes- 
sengers heralded  it,  "Glory  to  God  in  the  highest;  on 
earth  peace  and  good  will  to  men."  I  know  the  gentle- 
man made  a  desperate  effort  to  show  that  Jesus  did  nof 


yudgment — P?inishment.  38 1 

come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father;  and,  to  sustain  such  a 
remarkable  position,  tried  to  twist  some  of  our  Lord's 
words  into  a  shape  to  his  liking,  Christ,  though,  when 
he  "was  on  earth  was  "  The  man  Christ  Jesus,  "The  Son 
of  God,"  "  In  the  brightness  of  God's  glory,  and  the 
express  image  of  his  person."  Heb.  i.  3.  Was  there 
no  "glory"  in  all  that?  "For  unto  us  a  child  is  born, 
unto  us  a  son  is  given :  and  the  government  shall  be 
upon  his  shoulders:  and  his  name  shall  be  called  Wonder- 
ful, Counsellor,  The  mighty  God,  The  everlasting  Father, 
The  Prince  of  Peace.  Of  the  increase  of  his  govern- 
ment and  peace  there  shall  be  no  end,  upon  the  throne 
of  David,  and  upon  his  kingdom,  to  order  it,  and  to 
establish  it  with  judgment  and  with  justice  from  hence- 
forth even  forever.  The  zeal  of  the  Lord  of  hosts  will 
perform  this."  Isa.  ix.  6,  7-  Was  there  no  "  glory  "  in 
such  a  character  and  purpose.''  What  folly  men  will 
sometimes  run  into. 

The  gentleman  read  Rev.  xx.  1 1-15.  The  judgment 
of  that  passage  is,  of  course,  the  same  as  that  of  Matt. 
XXV.  31 — a  judgment  of  the  nations.  The  dead  were  to 
be  judged.  Does  he  contend  that  dead  persons  will  be 
judged.^  Is  this  literal?  Is  the  "  lake  of  fire"  literal? 
He  laughs  at  the  idea  that  anything  is  jigurative.  If 
this  is  not  figurative,  dead  persons  will  stand  and  be 
judged!  But  if  this  is  figurative,  the  whole  passage 
may  be.  Without  doubt  "  the  dead  "  means  the  "  dead 
in  trespasses  and  in  sins."  Christ  began  to  judge  such 
long  since,  as  we  have  seen. 

After  all  spoken  of  in  that  passage  had  passed  away 
— some  of  the  judged  cast  into  the  "  lake"  and  some  into 
the  "  holy  cit}^,"  we  have  this  about  those  in  the  "  city," 
"  And  the  nations  of  them  that  are  saved  shall  walk  in 


382  Oral  Discussion. 

the  light  of  it:  and  the  kings  of  the  earth  do  bring  their 
glory  and  honor  into  it."  Rev.  xxi.  24.  This  city,  the 
gentleman  contends,  is  heaven  after  the  resurrec- 
tion. If  he  is  right,  there  will  be  nations  in  heaven, 
and  "KINGS  OF  the  earth"  there.  But  he  has  told  us 
over  and  over,  that  there  will  be  no  nations  in  heaven. 
Now,  what  will  the  man  do.''  He  must  either  admit 
there  will  be  nations  there,  or  admit  that  the  judgment 
of  "  the  dead"  is  not  at  the  end  of  time.  He  must 
do  one  or  the  other.  Which  will  he  do.?  We  will 
see.  No  doubt  this  is  the  same  "holy  city,"  "  the  new 
Jerusalem "  that  Paul  said  he  and  his  brethren  had 
"  COME  to."  It  was  manifested  in  Paul's  day,  and  still 
more  in  after  times.  For  the  meaning  of  "  lake  of 
fire"  I  refer  to  Rev.  xvii.  8,  11,  and  xix.  20,  21.  \Time 
expired. 


[mr.  Sweeney's  closing  speech.] 

While  the  gentleman  was  laboring  so  arduously  to 
make  3'ou  believe  that  I  rely  simply  upon  the  phrase 
"all  nations"  to  prove  a  universal  judgment,  I  was 
reminded  of  the  venerable  saying,  that,  "a  drowning 
man  will  catch  at  straws."  The  phrase  "  all  nations  " 
may  include  all  mankind,  and  it  may  not.  So  the 
gentleman  understands  it.  But  it  was  amusing  to  hear 
him  contending  that  "  all  nations  whom  thou  hast 
made "  means  more  than  simply  "  all  nations,"  as  if  God 
had  "made"  more  nations  than  "«//  nations"!  That 
was  decidedly  a  rich  criticism. 

The  gentleman  has  admitted  that  Matt.  xxv.  and  2 
Thes.  i.  refer  to  the  same  matter;  and  what  is  meant  by 


Jtidgment — Punishment.  383 

"  all  nations,"  Matt,  xxv.,  is'explained  in  3  Thes.  I.,  where 
the  apostle  sjDeaks  of  "  us,"  [the  apostles]  "  you,"  [Chris- 
tians], and  of  "  them  that  ki»ow  not  God  and  obey  not 
the  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  In  i  Thes.  iv. 
he  uses  these  phi'ases :  "We  who  are  alive  and  remain 
unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord,"  and  "  them  that  are 
asleep,"  or  dead.  That  is,  the  living  and  the  dead. 
Then,  in  i  Cor.,  where,  as  I  have  shown,  he  treats  of 
the  same  subject,  he  uses  language  that  all  of  us  admit 
means  all  mankind.  Then  why  should  the  gentleman 
try  to  impress  you  that  I  rely  simply  upon  the  phrase 
"all  nations"  (which  I  had  before  said  does  not  neces- 
sarily include  every  individual)  to  prove  a  universal 
judgment.''     I  am  sure  I  cannot  tell. 

Mr.  Manford  astonishes  me  by  seriously  contending  that 
the  Savior  must  have  come  in  his  glory  in  the  lifetime  of 
the  disciples  to  whom  he  directly  addressed  himself  in 
Matt,  xxiv.,  because  he  used  the  pronouns  of  the  second 
person,  "ye"  and  "you."  Let  us  try  this  argument. 
In  Acts  iii.  22,  we  have  the  following  language  by  Peter: 
"  For  Moses  truly  said  unto  the  fathers,  A  Prophet  shall 
the  Lord  your  God  raise  up  unto  you.,  of  your  brethren, 
like  unto  me;  him  shall  ye  hear  in  all  things,  whatso- 
ever he  shall  say  unto  you."  Now  these  words  quoted 
from  Moses  by  Peter  were  addressed  directly  to  the 
Jews  living  moi^e  than  1400  years  before  Christ  was 
born.  Moses  spoke  directly  to  them,  using  the  pro- 
nouns of  the  second  person,  "ye"  and  "you,"  just  as 
Jesus  did  in  Matt.  xxiv.  Now  cannot  our  learned 
friend  here,  by  his  kind  of  argument,  prove  that  Jesus 
came  the  first  time  in  the  lifetime  of  the  Jews  to  whom 
Moses  spoke  directly,  just  as  easily  as  he  "demonstrates" 
that  Jesus  came   in   his  glory  in  the   lifetime  of  the  dis- 


384  Oral  Discussion. 

ciples  to  whom  he  directly  addressed  hunself  ?  Of  course 
he  can.  The  learned  gentleman  should  remember  that 
Jesus  was  not  simply  telling  his  disciples  how  to  go  "  to 
the  court-house''^  I  He  was  speaking  for  all  time  to 
come.  Moses  was  the  prophet  of  God,  and  he  so  spoke, 
as  we  have  seen ;  and  Jesus  was  that  prophet  like  unto 
Moses,  and  in  this  respect  spoke  like  unto  him. 

The  gentleman  spent  quite  a  portion  of  his  time  tell- 
ing us  ho-do  long  eternity  will  be,  and  what  a  frightful 
thought  is  that  of  etei'nal  punishment!  I  have  no  ob- 
jections to  his  parading  those  figures  and  speaking  that 
piece  all  over  the  countiy  while  he  lives.  I  would  only  • 
suggest  that  if  he  would  wind  up  every  time  by  telling 
the  people  how  infinitely  important  it  is  for  them  to 
obey  the  Lord — that  Jesus  is  "  the  author  of  eternal 
salvation  to  them  that  obey  him  " — instead  of  scouting 
the  necessity  of  being  "baptized  in  water,"  in  my 
humble  judgment  he  would  do  more  good  than  he  does 
by  trying  to  "stagger  belief,"  by  telling  them  that  I 
believe  that  God  will  '"''gratify  a  fiendish  spirit "  by 
damning  them  eternally  for  not  being  "baptized  in  water." 
By  the  way,  while  I  do  not  believe  that  God  will  damn 
anybody  eternally  simply  "  for  not  being  baptized  in 
water,"  I  do  believe  that  many  will  be  damned  eternally 
for  that  settled  and  willful  determination  not  to  obey  the 
Lord,  which  may  crop  out  in  a  refusal  to  be  "  baptized 
in  water"  just  about  as  well  as  anywhere  else.  I  say  to 
you,  my  friends,  in  all  sincerity  and  earnestness,  I  would 
not,  for  all  the  gold  and  glory  this  world  can  give,  stand 
before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ  in  the  shoes  of  him 
who  wittingly  trifles  with  a7ty  commandment  of  God. 

I  know  not  just  luhat  the  punishment  of  the  wicked 
will  be.     I  have  not  said  I  do.     I  am  not  responsible  for 


Judgment — Punishment.  385 

what  Spurgeon  or  any  one  else  has  said  on  the  subject. 
A  great  many  fooUsh  things  have  been  said  on  all  sub- 
jects. I  believe  the  Bible.  I  have  studied  it  prayerfully, 
and  in  the  fear  of  God.  I  believe  it  teaches  that  w^hen 
Jesus  shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  the  wricked 
will  be  separated  from  them,  and  punished  with  ever- 
lasting destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  and 
from  the  glory  of  his  power — not  "  to  gratify  a  fiendish 
spirit,"  as  many  an  enemy  of  the  Bible  has  said,  but 
because  they  'will  fzot  be  saved — will  not  love  virtue  for 
virtue's  sake,  but  "  have  pleasure  in  unrighteousness " 
and  "  glory  in  their  shame." 

My  friend,  of  course,,,  will  never  believe  as  I  do  upon 
the  subject  of  this  discussion,  for  in  his  last  speech  he 
said,  "  I  would  not  if  I  could."  Aye,  that  is  the  secret 
of  much  unbelief.  "I  would  not  if  I  could."  What 
if  my  friend  had  stood  in  the  garden  when  God  made 
man  and  gave  him  control  of  the  world;  do  you  not 
suppose  he  would  have  said,  "I  would  not  if  I  could" 
believe  that  tears  and  sighs  and  sad  wails  will  freight 
every  breeze  that  goes  wp  to  heaven  for  thousands  of 
years?  If  my  good  friend  had  the  control  of  this 
world  I  suppose  he  would  have  no  sin  or  suffering  at  all 
in  it.  But  he  does  not  control  it.  And  if  God  does  not 
control  it  to  suit  him,  he  will  not  submit;  but  will  say, 
"  I  would  not  if  I  could." 

RECAPITULATION. 

We  agree  that  Jesus  taught,  when  here,  that  he  would 
come  again ;  that  he  would  come  to  judge  the  world, 
and  that  from  that  judgment  the  wicked  would  be  pun- 
ished, and  that  their  punishment  would  be  what  tlie 
Bible  calls  everlasting:.     In  all  this  we  agree.     I  have 


3S6  Oral  Discussion. 

taken  the  ground  that  this  coming  of  Christ  to  judge 
the  world,  foretold  by  himself  and  often  referred  to  by 
his  inspired  apostles,  is  yet  future.  This  my  opponent 
has  stoutly  denied,  asserting,  on  the  other  hand,  that  it 
took  place  when  the  "  kingdom  was  set  up,"  and  that 
the  judgment  day  is  the  Gospel  day — began  when  Christ 
entered  upon  his  reign.  At  least  this  has  seemed  to  be 
his  position,  at  times,  though  at  other  times  he  has 
argued  as  stoutly  that  Christ  came  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  that  that  was  the  day  of  judgment. 

I.  I  have  shown  that  the  coming  of  Christ  to  judge 
the  world  is  described  as  a  coming  "  in  his  glory,  and  all 
the  holy  angels  with  him."  Matt.  xxv.  31.  At  his  com- 
ing "  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,"  the 
dead  are  to  be  raised,  the  world  judged,  the  saints  glori- 
fied, and  the  wicked  punished.  I  find  all  this  in  one 
passage : 

"Seeing  it  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God  to  recom- 
pense tribulation  to  them  that  trouble  you,  and  to  you 
who  are  troubled  rest  with  zts,  WHEN  the  Lord  Jesus 
shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his  mightv  angels, 
[evidentlv  same  coming  of  Matt.  xxv.J  in  flaming  fire, 
taking  vengeance  on  them  that  know  not  God  and  that 
obey  not  the  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall 
be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  pres- 
ence of  the  Lord  and  tlie  glory  of  his  power,  zvhen  he 
shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints."     2  Thes.  i.  6-10. 

The  gentleman  admits  that  this  passage  and  that  in 
Matt.  xxv.  refer  to  the  same  judgment  and  punishment, 
and  thus  concedes  that  the  coming  of  Christ  in  judg- 
ment to  punish  the  wicked,  is  the  same  as  his  coming 
"to  be  glorified  in  his  saints."  And  the  coming  of 
Christ  "  to  be  glorified  in   his   saints"  is   liis  coming  to 


yudgmenf — Punishment.  387 

raise  the  dead.  This,  I  think,  I  have  clearly  shown.  I 
will  briefly  refer  again  to  the  scriptures  by  which  I  claim 
to  have  done  so.  "When  Christ,  our  life,  shall  appear, 
then  shall  ye  also  appear  ivith  hitn  in  glory."  Col.  iii. 
4.  This  cjjnnot  refer  to  Christ's  appearing  "  in  his  king- 
dom," for  that  was  past,  and  the  Colossians  were  in  the 
kingdom  already,  as  we  learn  in  the  first  chapter  of  this 
Epistle.  It  cannot  refer  to  what  my  friend  calls  Christ's 
coming  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  for  then  the 
Colossians  did  ttot  "  appear  with  him  in  glory."  It  can- 
not be  shown  that  one  single  Colossian  Christian  was 
ever  in  Jerusalem.  But  to  prove  what  is  meant  by  Christ 
being  "glorified  in  his  saints"  and  his  saints  appearing 
"with  him  in  glory,"  I  quoted  Philip,  iii.  18-21,  where, 
after  speaking  of  the  "enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ, 
whose  end  is  destruction,"  the  apostle  says,  "For  our 
conversation  is  in  heaven,  yVo;;?  whence  also  we  look  for 
the  Savior,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  change  our 
vile  body^  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like  unto  h\s  glorious 
body."  Here  we  have  the  "  destruction  of  the  enemies 
of  the  cross  of  Christ "  connected  with  the  coming  of 
Christ  from  heaven  to  "change  our  vile  body,  that  it 
may  be  fashioned  like  unto  his  glorious  body."  This  is 
evidently  future.  But  to  prove  this  to  my  opponent's 
satisfaction  even,  I  have  shown  that  this  coming  is  the 
same  as  that  spoken  of  in  i  Cor.  xv.,  which  he  admits 
is  connected  with  the  "  immortal  resurrection."  Let  us 
again  notice  the  teaching  of  that  chapter:  "  As  in  Adam 
all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive,  but 
every  man  in  his  own  order,  *  ^  at  his  coming." 
Verses  23,  23.  Then,  at  verse  25,  the  apostle  speaks 
of  the  destruction  of  the  "  enemies,"  just  as  in  the  pas- 
sage in  Philippians.     And  in  verses  42,  43,  44,  he  speaks 


388  Oral  Discussion. 

of  the  change  of  "  our  vile  body,  that  it  may  be  fashioned 
like  unto  his  glorious  body,"  in  language  substantially 
the  same  as  that  in  Philippians.  Here  it  is:  "So  also 
is  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  *  *  *  It  is  sown 
in  dishonor,  [that  is,  a  '  vile  body,']  it  is  raised  in  glory ^ 
[that  is,  '  fashioned  like  unto  his  glorious  body,']  it  is 
sown  in  weakness,  it  is  raised  in  power;  it  is  sown  a 
natural  body^  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body."  Who  cannot 
see  that  the  teaching  of  these  passages  is  identically  the 
same?  This  last  one  is  the  only  one  my  friend  can 
afford  to  admit  teaches  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  I 
identify  its  teaching  with  that  of  others  from  the  same 
apostle,  and  thereby  show  that  it  refers  to  the  coming  of 
Christ  to  raise  the  dead,  judge  the  world,  punish  the 
wicked,  and  "  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints."  So  he  will 
have  to  deny  that  even  the  15th  of  Corinthians  teaches 
a  future  resurrection  of  the  dead — which,  by  the  way, 
he  did,  while  on  the  former  proposition.  His  resurrec- 
tion is  past  I  And  his  final  salvation  of  all  mankind  is 
past,  too!  Let  me  show  this  in  a  few  words.  You 
remember,  that  while  on  the  former  question  he  quoted 
- — or,  rather  z;?/5quoted — Peter's  language  in  Acts  iii.  21, 
wherein  the  apostle  speaks  of  "  the  times  of  restitution 
of  all  things,"  etc.,  and  made  "restitution  of  all  things," 
mean  the  reconciliation  and  salvation  of  all  men.  Now, 
let  us  read  the  whole  verse  in  connection  with  the  pre- 
ceding one:  "And  he  shall  send  Jesus  Christ,  who 
before  was  preached  unto  you;  whom  the  heaven  must 
receive  until  the  times  of  restitution  of  all  things  which 
God  hath  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  all  his  holy  prophets 
since  the  woi'ld  began."  Here  the  apostle  sj^eaks  of 
Jesus  being  sent  to  our  world  again ;  but  "  the  heaven 
must  receive  "  him,  he  says,  "  until  the  times  of  restitu- 


Judgment — Piot/'shmeni.  389 

tion  of  all  things"  etc.  But  my  friend  says  the  heaven 
only  received  him  ufztll  Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  and 
that  then  he  was  sent  again ;  and,  therefore,  "  the  times 
of  restitution  of  all  things" — and  hence  Mr.  Manford's 
universal  salvation — was  fulfilled  when  Jerusalem  was 
destroyed ! !  So  my  friend  has  crowded  the  coming  of 
Christ,  the  resurrection,  the  judgment,  the  punishment 
of  the  wicked,  and  his  universal  salvation^  all  into  the 
past!  Are  Universalists  ready  to  accept  all  this,  simply 
to  get  by  the  judgment?!  But  to  show  more  conclu- 
sively that  the  coming  of  the  Lord  to  be  glorified  in  his 
saints  is  future,  and  to  take  place  at  the  resurrection,  I 
read  i  Thes.  iv.  13-17:  I 

"  But  I  would  not  have  you  to  be  ignorant,  brethren, 
concerning  them  which  are  asleep,  that  ye  sorrow  not, 
even  as  others  who  have  no  hope.  *  *  For  this  we 
say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  [Matt,  xxiv.,  '  the 
word  of  the  Lord'  is  found,]  that  we  which  are  alive 
and  remain  unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord  shall  not  go 
before  them  which  are  asleep.  For  the  Lord  himself 
shall  descend  from  heaven  with  a  shout,  with  the 
voice  of  the  archangel,  and  with  the  trump  of  God ;  and 
the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first;  then  we  who  are  alive 
and  remain  shall  be  caught  up  together  with  them  in 
the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air;  and  so  shall  we 
ever  be  with  the  Lord." 

This  the  gentleman  makes  Jigierative,  notwithstanding 
it  is  almost  word  for  word  the  same  as  the  same  apostle's 
teaching  in  the  15th  of  Corinthians,  which  he  makes 
literal!  Let  us  compare  some  of  the  apostle's  language 
in  the  15th  of  Corinthians  with  this  to  the  Thessalonians. 
In  the  51st  and  53d  verses  of  that  chapter  he  says: 
"  Behold,  I  show  you  a  mystery :  we  shall  not  all  sleep, 
but  we    shall    all   be  changed,   in    a  moment,    in  the 


390  Oral  Discussion. 

twinkling  of  an  eye,  at  the  last  trump;  for  the  trumpet 
shall  sound,  and  the  dead  shall  be  raised  Incorruptible, 
and  wc  shall  be  changed."  Who  can  read  these  two 
passages  from  these  two  letters  of  the  same  apostle  and 
not  conclude  that  he  Is  treating  of  the  same  subject  in 
both?     I  am  ready  to  say  no  candid  man  can. 

11.  I  have  also  shown  by  scriptures  bearing  directly 
upon  the  subject,  that  the  judgment  connected  with  the 
comings  of  Christ  is  to  be  after  death,  and,  therefore, 
future.  I  have  time  now  to  recite  only  a  part  of  my 
proofs  upon  this  point. 

I.  In  the  first  place  I  cited  several  passages  from  the 
apostle  Paul,  putting  the  judgment  of  the  world  by 
Jesus  Christ  in  the.  future,  notwithstanding  he  lived  and 
wrote  in  the  kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ,  and,  therefore, 
after  Christ  had  come  "  in  his  kingdom."  Let  me  again 
refer  to  two  of  those  passages.  Acts  xvll.  31:  "Be- 
cause he  [God]  hath  appointed  a  day,  In  the  which  he 
w/// judge  the  world  in  righteousness  by  that  man  whom 
he  hath  ordained."  Here  the  apostle  teaches  a  judgment 
of  "the  xvorW  "in  righteousness"  by  Jesus  Christ,  at 
an  "appointed  day"  in  the.  future.  Now,  to  show  that 
this  judgment  is  after  death,  we  read  from  the  last 
Epistle  of  the  apostle's  life  some  words  spoken  just  before 
he  was  "offered."  2  Tim.  iv.  6,  7,  8 :  "For  I  am  now 
ready  to  be  offered,  and  the  time  of  my  departure  is  at 
hand :  I  have  fought  the  good  fight,  I  have  finished  my 
course.,  [earthly  career,]  I  have  kept  the  faith ;  he^tceforth 
there  Is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness,  which 
the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge.,  shall  give  me  at  that 
day;  and  not  to  me  only,  but  unto  all  them  also  that 
love  his  appearing.'^  This  is  perfectly  conclusive.  The 
apostle,  when  he  had  finished  his  earthly  career,  looked 


Judgment — Punishment.  391 

forward  to  "  that  day"  in  which  "  the  Lord  will  judge 
the  world  in  righteousness."  Then  he  expected  to  re- 
ceive a  crown  of  righteousness.  Observe,  also,  that  he 
connects  "that  day"  with  the  Lord's  ^^  appearing." 
Paul  was  not  looking  forward  to  the  Gospel  day,  for  his 
crown  of  righteousness;  for  as  respects  that,  he  had 
finished  his  course.  Nor  was  he  looking  forward  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  for  liis  crown — or  if  he  was,  he 
was  certainly  disappointed,  for  he  was  not  present  when 
that  little  town  was  disposed  of.  "That  day"  in  which 
Paul  expected  his  crown,  is  evidently  the  same  as  that 
"day"  in  the  which  God  will  judge  the  world  in  right- 
eousness by  Jesus  Christ.  He  had  already  said  in  this 
same  Epistle  to  Timothy,  chapter  i.  12:  "For  I  know 
whom  I  have  believed,  and  am  persuaded  that  he  is 
able  to  keep  that  which  I  have  committed  unto  him 
against  that  day." 

2.  I  have  shown  that  the  dead  are  to  be  judged,  and 
that  the  judgment  is  therefore  necessarily  after  death. 
Acts  X.  43:  "And  he  commanded  us  to  preach  unto  the 
people,  and  to  testify  that  it  is  he  which  was  ordained 
of  God,  to  be  the  Judge  of  quick  and  dead."  The 
gentleman  has  argued  and  quoted  various  "Doctors" 
to  prove  that  "quick  and  dead"  means  "saints  and 
sinners,"  and  I  grant  that  it  sometimes  does.  He  has 
also  proved,  after  his  manner  of  proving  things,  that  it 
means  "Jews  and  Gentiles."  But  I  have  shown  luhat 
fl?caa?  are  to  be  in  the  judgment.  Matt.  xi.  22:  "But  I 
say  unto  you.  It  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  Tyre  and 
Sidon  at  the  day  of  judgfne?zt,  than  for  you."  Matt, 
xii.  41,  43:  "The  men  of  Nineveh  shall  rise  in  judg- 
ment with  this  generation.  *  *  *  Xhe  queen  of 
the  south  shall  rise  up  in  the  judgment  witli  this  gen- 


39^ 


Oral  Discussion. 


eration."  Rev.  xx.  13,  13:  "And  I  saw  the  dead,  small 
and  great,  stand  before  God;  and  the  books  were 
opened:  and  another  book  was  opened,  which  is  the 
book  of  life:  and  the  dead  were  judged  out  of  those 
things  which  were  written  in  the  books,  according  to 
their  works.  And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were 
in  it ;  and  death  and  hell  \Jiades\  delivered  up  the  dead 
which  were  in  them :  and  they  were  judged  every  man 
according  to  their  works."  If  these  scriptures  do  not 
teach  that  the  dead  are  to  rise  and  be  judged,  then  lan- 
guage is  not  competent  to  so  teach. 

3.  In  the  third  place  I  have  shown  that  it  is  expressly 
taught  in  Scripture  that  the  judgment  is  after  death. 
Heb.  ix.  27:  "And  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to 
die,  but  after  this  the  judgment."  You  have  heard  the 
extemporized  interpretation  of  this  passage,  by  which 
Universalists  take  all  the  meaning  out  of  it;  but  you  are 
not  satisfied  with  it,  I  know.  The  passage  is  entirely  too 
plain  for  its  force  to  be  evaded  by  wit  or  cavil. 

III.  The  wicked,  I  have  shown,  are  reserved  unto 
the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished,  and  are  to  be  pun- 
ished after  death.  Rom.  ii.  <, :  "  But  after  thy  hardness 
and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wrath 
against  the  day  of  wrath,  and  rev^elation  of  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God."  2  Peter  iii.  7 :  "But  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,  which  are  now,  by  the  same  word  are 
kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fii'e  against  the  day  of  judg- 
ment and  perdition  of  ungodly  men."  2  Peter,  ii.  9 : 
"  The  Lord  knoweth  how  to  deliver  the  godly  out  of 
temptations,  and  to  reserve  the  unjust  unto  the  day  of 
judgment  to  be  punished."  Matt.  x.  38:  "And  fear 
not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill 
the  soul :  but  rather  fear  him  which  is  able  to  destroy 


yudgment — Punishment.  393 

both  soul  and  body  in  hell."  Luke  xii.  4,  5 :  "And  I 
say  unto  you,  my  friends,  Be  not  afraid  of  them  that  kill 
the  body,  and  after  that,  have  no  more  that  they  can  do. 
But  I  will  forewarn  you  whom  ye  shall  fear:  Fear  him; 
which  after  he  hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into  hell, 
yea,  I  say  unto  you.  Fear  him."  The  word  "hell"  in 
the  last  two  passages,  the  gentleman  has  correctly  told 
you  is  from  "  Gehenna^''  and  literally  means  the  "  valley 
of  Hinnom."  But  he  admits  that  our  Savior  used  it  in 
another  sense.  He  does  not  believe  the  Savior  was,  in 
this  language,  only  admonishing  his  disciples  to  "  Fear 
him  who,  after  he  hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into 
the  valley  of  Hinnom  "  .''  He  seems,  however,  to  think 
that  the  Sa\ior  meant  only  the  punishment  that  was 
coming  upon  the  Jewish  nation !  Then,  I  suppose  the 
Savior  meant  to  forewarn  his  disciples  to  "  Fear  him 
who,  after  he  hath  killed"  hath  power  to  cast  both  soul 
and  body  into  the  calamities  that  were  to  come  upon  the 
Jewish  nation"!  That  is  decidedly  sublime!  The 
gentleman  makes  an  after-death  hell,  even  of  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem ! 

True,  Gehenna  literally  means  a  valley  in  this  world. 
It  is  also  true  that  paradise  literally  means  a  place  in 
this  world.  Heaven  [from  the  Greek  Ouranos^  literally 
means  "  the  regions  of  the  air."  But  paradise  in  the 
New  Testament  does  not  mean  a  park,  or  a  garden ;  but 
a  place  of  future  rest.  Heaven,  also,  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, often  means  the  place  of  future  bliss.  So,  by 
Gehenna,  in  these  passages,  the  Savior  evidently  means 
a  place  of  punishment  after  death.  "  Fear  him,  who, 
AFTER  HE  HATH  KILLED,  hath  power  to  cast 
into  Gehenna^ 

IV.  Endlessness  of  punishment.  To  prove  that  the 
34 


394  Oral  Discussion. 

punishment  of  the  wicked  will  be  endless,  I  quoted  the 
following  scriptures :  Matt.  xxv.  46,  "  And  these  shall 
go  away  into  everlasting  punishment:  but  the  righteous 
into  life  eternal."  2  Thes.  i.  9,  "  Who  shall  be  punished 
with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the 
Lord,  and  froin  the  glory  of  his  power."  I  showed  that 
the  word  rendered  everlasting  in  these  passages  does 
mean  endless.  The  gentleman  makes  a  great  ado,  be- 
cause the  phrase  "endless  punishment"  does  not  occur 
in  the  Bible.  But  he  paid  no  attention  to  the  fact  that 
"endless"  occurs  but  once  in  the  New  Testament,  where 
it  can  be  claimed  that  it  means  literally  eternal,  and 
there  it  is  used  by  Paul  as  equivalent  to  the  word  that  is 
rendered  "forever,"  and  "everlasting."  Aionios^  the 
word  rendered  everlasting  in  these  passages,  is  the  word 
by  which  the  Greeks  ordinarily  expressed  endless  dura- 
tion, as  eveiy  Greek  scholar  knows.  Adjuncts  of  quality 
were  used  by  the  Greeks,  which  we  allow  imply  endless- 
ness, because  they  usually  describe  such  things  as  are 
said  to  be  eternal  or  everlasting.  But  aionios  was  the 
word  by  which  Greek  writers  expressed  endlessness. 

The  gentleman  told  us  that  the  Pharisees  did  actually 
teach  the  docti^ine  of  endless  punishment,  but  that  they 
used  aidios  and  not  aionios  to  express  endless.  This 
was  amusing.  Does  not  every  Greek  scholar  know  that 
aidios  and  aionios  come  from  the  same  root  precisely.'' 
They  are  both  from  aei.,  that  is  defined  "ever,  always, 
forever."  All  the  duratioit.,  therefore,  that  is  in  aidios 
is  in  aionios.,  as  they  both  derive  their  idea  of  duration 
from  the  same  adverb  aei.  Therefore,  I  claim  that  in 
admitting  the  Pharisees  taught  endless  punishment,  the 
gentleman  unwittingly  gave  up  the  controversy! 

But  the  Savior  said,  "  Beware  of  the  leaven  of  the 


Judgment — Punishment.  39^ 

Pharisees,"  which,  Mr.  Manford  tells  us,  was  endless 
punishment;  but,  fortunately  for  the  truth,  the  Savior 
added,  "which  is  hypocrisy."  But  as  the  gentleman 
admits  the  Pharisees  taught  the  doctrine  of  endless  pun- 
ishment, did  it  never  occur  as  strange  to  him  that  the 
Savior,  if  he  was  a  Universalist,  did  not  repudiate  it  in 
a  manner  something  like  that  in  which  Mr.  Manford 
now  repudiates  it.''     He  could  have  done  so. 

We  are  told  that  kolasis,  the  woi'd  rendered  punishment 
in  Matt.  XXV.,  means  "correction;"  and  tliat  therefore 
"everlasting  punishment"  only  means  "everlasting  cor- 
rectio7i "  !  Mr.  M.  thinks  that  when  a  sinner  rejects  the 
Gospel  he  then  goes  away  into  correction.,  or  training! 
Well,  into  what  does  he  go  who  receives  the  Gospel } 
Does  he  go  into  the  opposite  of  correction  or  training.? 
That  into  which  the  wicked  will  go  is  contrasted  with 
that  into  which  the  righteous  will  go,  according  to  the 
Savior;  and  if  Mr.  M.  proves  that  the  wicked  will  go 
into  everlasting  correction,  or  training,  or  progress.,  he 
will  come  pretty  near  sending  the  righteous  into  ever- 
lasting punishment!     Anything  to  save  the  wicked! 

But  we  may  learn  what  is  meant  by  punishment  in 
Matt.  XXV.  by  consulting  2  Thes.  i. — "Who  shall  he  pun- 
ished with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of 
the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power."  This  tells 
what  is  meant  by  "punishment"  in  Matt.  xxv.  VVe  have 
agreed  that  both  passages  refer  to  the  same  matter. 

The  gentleman  tells  us  that  "  all  divine  punishment  is 
reformatory."  How  does  he  know  that  to  be  true  }  He 
does  not  know  it  at  all.  It  is  7iot  true.  Chastening 
may  "yield  the  peaceable  fruits  of  righteousness  to  them 
that  are  exercised  thereby,"  provided  they  as  sons  are 
willing  "to  be  in  subjection  unto  the  Father  of  spirits, 


396  Oral  Discussion. 

and  live."  Therefore  the  Apostle  says:  '■'■  If  ye  endure 
chastening,  God  dealeth  with  you  as  with  sons:  for 
what  so?z  is  he  whom  the  father  chasteneth  not?  But  if 
ye  be  without  chastisement,  whereof  all  are  partakers, 
then  are  ye  bastards^  and  not  sotis."  Heb.  xii.  7,  8. 
Some  are  "bastards,  and  not  sons;"  and  such  are  called 
"  the  enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ,  whose  end  is  [not 
correction,  for  they  will  not  be  corrected,  but]  destruc- 
tion T  This  is  a  sufficient  answer  to  all  that  was  said 
about  punishment  being  reformatory.  I  would  have  all 
our  hearers  read  all  the  passages  the  gentleman  cited  as 
bearing  upon  this  point,  in  their  connection,  and  they 
will  have  no  trouble  in  understanding  them.  He  also 
read  you  from  the  Old  Testament  of  certain  temporal 
judgments  sent  upon  different  nations  in  olden  times, 
and  claimed  that  those  passages  related  to  the  same  mat- 
ter to  which  Matt.  xxv.  relates.  To  see  how  false  and 
utterly  absui-d  such  a  claim  is,  you  have  only  to  read 
those  Scriptures  in  their  connection,  and  then  carefully 
compare  them  with  Matt.  xxv. 

But  my  allotted  time  is  out,  and  I  very  cheerfully  sub- 
mit the  argument.  I  heartily  thank  you.  Gentlemen 
Moderators,  Ladies,  and  Gentlemen,  for  the  kindness 
and  uniform  courtesy  you  have  extended  to  us  during 
our  discussion,  and  for  the  attention  you  have  given  to 
what  we  have  had  to  say.  May  God  bless  you,  and 
give  you  wisdom  to  choose  the  right  and  the  safe  way. 
[  Time  expired. 


yudgment — Punishment.  397 

[mr.  manford's  closing  reply.] 

My  friend's  varied  notions  concerning  what  "  all 
nations  "  mean  reminds  one  of  the  sand  bars  of  the  Mis- 
souri river — very  changeable — very  uncertain.  When  I 
read  the  glorious  Promise,  that  "  All  nations  whom  Thou 
hast  made  shall  come  and  worship  before  thee,  O  Lord, 
and  glorify  thy  name,"  that  "  All  nations  of  the  earth, 
all  families  of  the  earth,  all  kindreds  of  the  earth,  shall 
be  blessed  in  Christ,"  he  boldly  and  stoutly  contended, 
over  and  over  again,  that  such  language,  in  the  Bible, 
did  not  include  the  dead — only  referred  to  men  while  in 
this  world.  He  had  to  take  that  position  then,  or  admit 
that  all  mankind  will  finally  be  blessed  in  Christ,  and 
worship  and  glorify  God;  or,  in  other  woi'ds,  "  be  recon- 
ciled to  God  and  saved,"  as  my  first  proposition  reads. 
That  is  the  explanation  he  gave  those  passages  all 
through  the  discussion  on  the  first  proposition. 

But  when  the  second  proposition  came  before  us,  he 
wanted  to  prove  that  all  the  dead  would  be  judged,  and 
some  sent  to  heaven  and  some  to  an  endless  hell;  and  to 
do  that  he  cited  these  words,  "  And  before  him  shall  be 
gathered  all  nations."  He  contended  then,  in  direct 
opposition  to  what  he  had  said  before,  that  "  all  nations" 
mean  all  mankind  from  Adam  to  the  last  person  that 
God  should  create.  He  afiirmed  that  passage  teaches, 
that  all  the  dead  will  be  assembled  before  God's  bar  to 
be  judged.  That  is  what  he  read  it  to  prove.  But  I 
reminded  him  of  what  he  had  said  about  "all  nations" 
not  including  the  dead;  and  he  at  once  saw  where  he 
was,  and  so  admitted  that  all  nations  did  not  include 
the  dead;  but  he  added,  "the  dead  will  be  raised  and 
judged  too"  clearly  making  a  distinction  between  " the 


39^  Oral  Discussion. 

dead  "  and  the  "  nations."  I  then  showed  that  Jesus,  in 
that  passage  (Matt.  xxv.  31-40),  said  nothing  about  the 
dead,  the  resurrection,  or  a  future  state.  He  simply 
spoke  about  judging  tlie  nations.  Our  friend  saw  that 
he  was  again  cornered  and  exposed,  and  in  his  last 
speech  gave  up  this  second  position  with  regard  to  all 
nations  not  including  the  dead,  and  affirmed,  that  "  all 
nations  may  include  all  mankind,"  that  is,  the  dead  as 
well  as  the  living. 

I  confess,  that  I  cannot  understand  how  an  honest  and 
sincere  man  can  resort  to  such  trickery  in  defense  of  his 
faith.  Before  I  would  beat  about  in  that  manner  to 
save  my  cause  I  would  give  it  up. 

After  shifting  about  in  this  disgraceful  manner  to 
make  out  that  somebody  will  be  damned  eternally,  he 
contended  that  "  all  nations  may  mean  all  mankind," 
yea,  that  such  terms  do  sometimes  mean  all  mankind. 
Surely,  if  "  all  nations"  ever  mean  all  mankind,  they  mean 
that  in  the  Promise  of  God  to  man.  In  that  Promise 
the  words  "  all  nations"  arc  so  carefully  qualified  that  their 
intent  is  as  clear  as  daylight.  The  Promise  reads,  "  All 
nations  whom  Thou  hast  made,"  "  All  nations  of  the 
EARTH,"  "  All  families  OF  the  earth,"  "  All  kindreds 
OF  the  earth."  And  then,  to  remove  all  doubt  of  the 
universality  of  the  Promise,  it  is  expressed  in  other 
terms  equally  as  universal  in  their  meaning:  "Every 
knee  shall  bow,  and  every  tongue  shall  swear  that  in 
the  Lord  have  I  righteousness  and  strength,"  "I  will 
draw  ALL  men  to  me,"  "  To  him  are  all  things,"  "  As 
in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made 
alive."  These  passages  all  relate  to  the  one  Promise — 
the  Promise  of  universal  blessedness. 

The  gentleman  thinks  it  is  funny  that  "all  nations" 


yudgment — Punishment.  399 

may  mean  less  than  "  all  nations  whom  God  hath  made," 
but  that  it  is  profound  wisdom  to  assert  that  "  all  nations 
whom  God  hath  made  "  means  less  than  simply  all  na- 
tions! We  all  know  that  by  the  words  "all  nations" 
we  often  mean  all  nations  of  a  given  period  or  given 
portion  of  the  earth ;  but  I  challenge  him  to  produce  a 
passage  in  the  Bible  where  the  phrase  "  All  nations 
whom  God  has  made"  means  one  soul  less  than  all 
mankind.     It  cannot  be  done. 

In  the  discourse  of  which  his  text  is  a  portion,  "  all 
nations"  occurs  several  times.  Christ  told  his  eleven 
disciples,  that  "  ye  shall  be  hated  of  all  nations."  There, 
all  nations,  of  course,  meant  the  existing  nations  of  the 
earth  when  the  disciples  were  living.  Again,  he  said, 
"And  this  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached  in  all 
the  world,  for  a  witness  unto  all  nations,"  and  Paul  wrote 
a  few  years  after,  that  "  their  sound  went  into  all  the 
earth,  and  their  words  unto  the  ends  of  the  world ;  "  that 
the  Gospel  had  been  "  preached  to  every  creature  which 
is  under  heaven."  These  passages  explain  what  is 
meant  by  all  nations  in  the  gentleman's  pi-oof-text. 

He  is  astonished  beyond  measure,  that  I  am  so  stupid  as 
to  suppose  that  when  a  person  is  addressing  another,  he 
means  by  you  and  ye^  the  person  or  persons  addressed,  not 
somebody  that  may  be  living  on  earth  somewhere  thou- 
sands of  years  hence.  He  thinks,  that  when  Christ  told 
his  disciples,  "  When  YOU  shall  see  all  these  things  " — ■ 
one  of  which  was  his  coming  in  power  and  glory,  he  did 
not  mean  they  should  see  one  of  them,  but  somebody's 
eyes  would  see  them  several  thousand  years  after !  It  is 
pretty  hard  to  believe,  that  a  man  can  be  in  earnest  in 
such  kind  of  talk.  But  he  must  be  so  absurd  as  to 
say  that  you  and  ye  do  not  mean  you  and  ye,  or  admit 


4CK!)  Oral  Discussion. 

that  Christ  has  come  in  judgment.  And  then  he  told 
us,  that  Moses,  when  he  said  "  A  Prophet  shall  the  Lord 
your  God  raise  up  unto  you"  used  the  word  you  in  the 
same  ridiculous  sense.  Here  again  he  is  mistaken. 
Barnes  says,  "This  promise  pertains  to  the  series  of 
prophets  which  God  would  raise  up,  and  has  no  direct 
reference  to  the  Messiah."  And  he  says  this  is  the  view 
nearly  all  commentators  take  of  the  passage.  Joshua 
was  one  of  the  series,  and  the  Jews,  Moses  addressed, 
did  behold  him.  So  hy  you  Moses  meant  those  he  was 
talking  to. 

He  said  that  I  "  scouted  the  necessity  of  being  bap- 
tized in  water.  I  do  no  such  a  thing.  Baptism  is  a 
useful  institution.  It  is  so  regarded  by  my  brethren. 
But  we  do  not  think  it  is  a  condition  of  salvation,  and 
all  go  to  hell  who  are  not  immersed  in  water.  My 
brethren  are  as  earnest  in  the  necessity  of  obeying  the 
Gospel  as  any  people  can  be,  notwithstanding  his  false 
insinuation.  He  may- deny  here  that  immersion  is  a 
condition  of  salvation;  but  I  have  proved  from  his  own 
productions  that  he  believes  there  is  no  salvation  without 
it.  He  has  said  several  times  that  I  misrepresented  him 
and  his  brethren,  and  in  my  last  reply  I  remarked : 

"  The  gentleman  said  I  garbled  his  printed  sermon, 
Webster's  dictionary,  and  the  productions  of  his  brethren 
I  had  read  from.  Now  let  him  prove  it.  I  demand 
PROOF.  Here  are  the  books,  magazines,  and  papers  I 
read  from.  Now,  sir,  prove  your  charge  or  take  it  back. 
He  has  charged  me  several  times  with  misrepresenting  A. 
Campbell ;  but  he  has  never  attanpted  to  prove  it.  I 
can  prove  he  has  misrepresented  Campbell,  and  will 
do  it  if  it  is  denied." 

This  is  what  I  called  on  him  to  do,  but  he  passed  it 


Judgment — Punishment.  401 

all  in  silence.  He  knew  I  had  not  misrepresented  him, 
his  brethren,  or  the  dictionary.  He  teaches,  his  brethren 
teach,  that  there  is  not  a  promise  in  the  Bible  for  one 
that  has  not  been  immersed  in  water.  In  one  of  his 
speeches  he  said  I  had  pretended  to  have  had  a  discus- 
sion with  Rev.  Alexander  Campbell,  of  Bethany,  Va. 
There  is  not  a  word  of  truth  in  his  statement. 

The  brother  said,  "  I  know  not  just  what  the  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked  will  be ; "  and  all  through  this  dis- 
cussion he  has  tried  to  make  us  think,  that  endless  dam- 
nation will  be  about  what  most  of  mankind  will  want 
in  hell,  and  he  has  charged  me  with  misrepresenting  his 
and  his  brethren's  views  of  future  punishment.  It  seems 
he  has  made  similar  statements  about  hell  in  another 
quarter,  and  one  of  his  brethren  calls  him  to  an  account 
for  it.  I  find  the  following  in  the  Christian  Standard^ 
the  Disciple  organ  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  from  S.  W. 
Leonard : 

"  Bro.  Sweeney  says :  '  I  know  not  what  the  future 
hell  of  the  wicked  will  be,  any  more  than  I  know  what 
the  heaven  of  the  righteous  will  be.'  But,  do  we  all 
believe  what  the  Bible  says?  Let  us  see.  Christ  says, 
Matt.  XXV.  41 :  '  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlast- 
ing FIRE,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels.'  The 
Revelator  says.  Rev.  xx.  10:  'The  devil  that  deceived 
them  was  cast  into  a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  *  * 
and  shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  forever  and 
ever.'  Also  xxi.  8 :  '  But  the  fearful  and  unbelieving, 
*  *  shall  have  their  part  in  the  lake  which  burneth 
with  fire  and  brimstone,'  This  we  believe;  but  Bro. 
S.  don't  even  suppose  it  to  be  true,  for  he  says :  '  I 
have  never  supposed  that  God  is  going  to  follow  up  the 
poor  wretched  man  who  will  not  have  heaven,  and  vin- 
dictively punish  him  to  all  eternity  with  some  horrible 
instrument  of  torture  in  a  lake  literally  burning  with  fire 


402 


Oral  Discussion. 


and  brimstone.  Nothing  of  the  sort.'  So  we  see  that 
neither  Christ  nor  John  came  any  way  near  suiting  Bro. 
S.  in  their  description  of  hell.  He  cannot  even  suppose 
that  it  will  be  anything  like  their  representation  of  it. 
Neither  does  he  believe  that  Christ  told  the  truth  in 
Matt.  XXV.  41,  in  saying  that  hell  was  'prepared;'  for 
Bro.  S.  says,  '  Perhaps  the  sinner  will,  in  a  gi'eat  meas- 
ure, make  his  own  hell,  which  may  not  be  wholly 
unlike  some  scenes  in  this  world.'  Such  teaching  would 
suit  the  Spiritualists;  but  Dives  (see  Luke  xvi.)  tried  in 
vain  to  get  a  drop  of  water  into  his  hell." 

This  brother  Leonard  is  sound  in  the  faith,  and  don't 
adopt  his  brother  Sweeney's  new  fangled  notions  about 
hell.  He  even  charges  his  brother  with  infidelity,  and 
with  pretending  to  be  wiser  than  Christ.  Now,  this 
Mr.  Leonard  is  right,  and  Mr.  Sweeney  is  wrong,  if 
those  passages  quoted  mean  endless  torment.  Spur- 
geon,  Edwards,  and  all  these  other  hell-fii*e  preachers  are 
right,  if  those  passages  mean  what  Mr.  Sweeney  says 
they  do  mean — endless  punishment.  Either  the  Spur- 
geon  view  of  those  passages  must  be  received,  or  the 
Universalist  view.  One  or  the  other.  There  is  no 
middle  ground.  Either  the  horrors  of  hell  are  fast 
imaginatio7i,  as  Mr.  Sweeney's  hymn  book  sings,  or 
sin  and  woe  will  have  an  end. 

The  gentleman  told  us,  that  after  reading  the  Bible 
"  carefully  and  prayerfully "  he  was  satisfied  it  teaches 
"  everlasting  destruction."  Wonderful !  No  one  denies 
it  teaches  everlasting  destruction,  as  clearly  as  it  teaches 
that  the  priesthood  of  Aaron  was  an  '•'-everlasting 
priesthood ; "  that  the  Jews  should  have  "  the  land 
of  Canaan  for  an  everlasting  possession,"  (Gen.  xvii. 
7,  S) ;  that  the  "  mountains  are  everlasting"  though  they 
shall  be  "scattered"  (Hab.   iii.  6);  that  "the  servant 


jfudgment — Punishment  403 

shall  sen^e  his  masi&Y  forever  "  (Ex.  xxi.  6  ) ;  that  "stran- 
gers shall  be  hondvnen  forever  "  (Lev.  xxv.  46 ) ;  that  "  the 
earth  ahxdcth.  forever"  (Eccl.  i.  4) ;  that  "  the  earth  with 
her  bars  was  ahout  ]onah  forever  "  (Jonah  ii.  6).  If  the 
brother  has  read  the  Bible  "  carefully  and  prayerfully" 
he  must  have  seen  that  forever  and  everlasting  do  not 
mean  endless  duration,  but,  as  Barnes  says,  "  an  age." 
If  there  was  less  inlidelity  in  his  creed,  and  more  wis- 
dom, love,  mercy,  and  justice,  he  would  see  the  "  fiendish 
spirit"  of  endless  damnation,  and  be  amazed  at  the  un- 
belief that  believes  in  such  cruelty. 

No;  "I  would  not  if  I  could"  believe  in  eternal  hell 
torments.  While  God  is  Wise,  Merciful,  Just,  and 
Good;  while  Jesus  is  the  loving  Savior  of  the  world; 
while  the  Gospel  is  good  news  to  all,  I  would  not  believe 
in  eternal  wrath  and  vengeance.  God,  Jesus,  the  Law, 
the  Gospel,  must  all  be  transformed  into  pure  malignity 
before  I  can  subscribe  to  such  a  fiendish  creed.  From 
the  garden  of  Eden  to  the  ends  of  the  earth ;  from  Adam 
down  through  all  generations,  there  has  been  far  more 
virtue  than  vice,  truth  than  error,  joy  than  sorrow,  hap- 
piness than  misery,  hence  the  good  man  rejoices  that 
God  made  this  world.  But  if  this  world  had  been  the 
hell  of  the  gentleman's  creed,  angels  would  have  wept 
tears  of  blood  when  Adam  was  made  in  the  image  of 
God. 

The  gentleman  reached  his  "  recapitulation."  Let  us 
see  what  he  has  done  for  his  proposition.  He  assumed 
that  a  judgment  that  was  future  eighteen  hundred  years 
ago  must,  therefore^  be  future  now.  Such  a  "  must  there- 
fore "  is  not  worth  refuting.  Because  the  French  Revo- 
lution was  future  when  Christ  was  on  earth,  there  has 
not  yet   been   a   French  Revolution,  according  to  the 


404  Oral  Discussion. 

gentleman's  logic !  He  admitted  that  Christ,  when  on 
earth,  promised  to  come  again  in  his  kingdom,  shortly, 
and  that  that  coming  took  place  long  since.  That,  then, 
was  Christ's  Second  Coming.  His  coming  In  his 
kingdom.  Then  the  spirit  of  truth  was  poured  upon 
the  disciples,  and  Christ  was  "glorified  in  his  saints," 
and  he  has  been  "glorified  In  his  saints"  In  all  ages 
since  that  day.  They  were  then,  and  have  been  ever 
since,  exalted  to  the  right  hand,  to  heavenly  places  in 
Christ  Jesus;  they  entered  the  Gospel  kingdom  "which 
is  righteousness,  joy  and  peace  in  the  Holy  Spirit,"  and 
partook  of  its  life — its  everlasting  life.  That  was  a 
coming  In  "  glory,"  and  for  a  glorious  purpose.  But  the 
kingdom  was  to  be  taken  from  the  Jews,  and  they  cast 
into  outer  darkness.  As  the  temporal  judgment  that 
came  on  Idumea  Is  called  "  unquenchable  fire,"  punish- 
ment forever ;  as  the  seventy  years  captivity  of  the  Jews 
is  called  "  everlasting  shame,"  "  everlasting  contempt," 
so  the  tribulation  that  came  on  the  Jewish  nation  Is 
called  "  everlasting  punishment,"  "  everlasting  destruc- 
tion." And  as  the  principles  of  the  kingdom  blessed, 
saved,  and  glorified  In  the  first  century,  and  has  blessed, 
saved,  and  glorified  the  saints  in  all  ages  and  climes,  so 
the  principles  of  that  kingdom  have  condemned  error 
and  vice  In  high  and  low  places  among  all  nations,  "  the 
Jews  first,  and  also  the  Gentiles." 

When  Christ  came  in  his  kingdom,  his  reign,  his  judg- 
ment, commenced ;  and  that  reign,  that  judgment,  will 
continue  till  he  shall  resign  the  kingdom  to  God  the 
Father  (i  Cor.  xv.)  The  judgment  day  Is  the  day  of 
Christ's  reign.  It  commenced  when  Christ  came  In  his 
kingdom,  "to  be  glorified  of  his  saints"  and  dreaded  by 
his  enemies.     We  have  seen  that  Matt.  xxiv.  and  xxv. ; 


Judgment — Punishment.  405 

2  Thes.  1.  6-10;  Acts  xvii.  31;  2  Peter  iii.  3-10,  and 
Rev.  XX.,  all  refer  to  this  coming  of  Christ  in  his  kingdom 
to  reign,  to  judge.  This  is  evident  from  the  passages 
themselves,  and  from  Matt.  x.  33,  xvi.  27,  38,  xxiv.  34; 
James  v.  7-9;  Rev.  xxii.  6,  7,  10,  13,  30.  These  pas- 
sages inform  us  ivhcn  the  gentleman's  proof-texts,  just 
referred  to,  were  fulfilled.  And  his  texts  are  further 
illustrated  by  Dan.  vii.  13,  14;  Isa.  ii.  3,  4,  ix.  6,  7, 
xxxiii.  I,  16,  xxxiv.  1-16,  xlii.  i,  4;  Jer.  xxiii.  5, 
39,  40;  Zee.  xiv,  I.  2,  3.  1  hope  you  will  delib- 
erately examine  these  scriptures  I  refer  to  when  at 
your  homes,  and  you  will  see  that  they  illustrate  and 
explain  the  gentleman's  proof-texts,  and  show  that  he 
has  misapplied  them.  For  what  is  meant  hy  Jire,  hell, 
punish?nent,  I  refer  you  to  the  quotations  from  the 
Bible  in  my  last  reply,  to  which  the  brother  paid  but 
little  attention. 

My  friend  told  us,  that  aionios  is  the  word  by  which 
the  Greeks  expressed  endless  duration.  We  have  only 
his  say  so  for  that,  as  he  furnished  no  evidence  of  its 
truth,  whereas  I  have  proved  from  the  best  authority 
that  aiofiios  means  time  indefinite.  Even  A.  Campbell 
says  it  signifies  "  time  indefinite."  The  learned  world 
is  against  the  gentleman.  Besides,  neither  Christ  nor  his 
disciples  were  Greeks ;  they  were  Hebrews,  and  we  have 
proved  that  neither  Josephus  nor  the  Bible  writers  meant 
endless  duration  by  everlasting.  Philo,  Josephus,  and 
the  Pharisees,  expressed  endless  duration  by  aidlos,  and 
the  brother  said  that  word  is  from  the  same  root  that 
aionios  is.  Half  of  that  statement  is  true,  and  half  is 
not  true.  Besides,  usage  attached  endless  duration  to 
aidios,  but  not  to  aionios ;  hence  the  Pharisees  used  the 
former  word  and  Jesus  the  latter. 


4o6  Oral  Discussion. 

So  much  concerning  the  coming  of  Christ  in  his 
kingdom,  to  reign,  to  judge,  to  reward,  and  punish.  The 
gentleman  has  made  a  poor  reply  to  my  arguments  on 
these  points.  But  he  did  the  best  he  could,  and  as  much 
as  any  one  could  do.  But  I  am  sorry  to  say,  that  there 
was  a  shameful  misrepresentation  running  through  all 
of  his  last  speech.  I  say  shameful,  because  it  must  have 
been  designed.  He  knew  better.  I  stated  distinctly  in 
my  first  reply  on  the  proposition  before  us  to-day,  that 
when  Jesus  would  deliver  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  it  is 
said  he  would  come  again.  He  came  in  power  and 
glory  in  his  kingdom,  and  then  the  judgment  com- 
menced. He  will  also  come  when  all  who  die  in  the 
Adamic  nature  shall  be  made  alive  in  the  heavenly  na- 
ture, to  deliver  up  the  kingdom,  the  redeemed  universe, 
to  God,  and  then  God  will  be  all  in  all  (i  Cor.  xv.)  And 
between  the  beginning  and  ending  of  this  kingdom ; 
between  the  coming  in  the  kingdom  and  the  coming  at 
the  end  of  it,  all  the  judgment,  punishment,  hell,  dam- 
nation, in  the  New  Testament,  are  limited.  There  is  no 
judgment,  punishment,  damnation,  hell,  after  Christ's 
coming  at  the  end  of  his  kingdom.  Nothing  of  the 
kind.     God  will  then  "  be  all  in  all." 

But  he  represented  me  as  affirming,  that  the  oialy 
coming  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament  was  Christ's 
coming  in  his  kingdom  before  some  whom  he  addressed 
would  die.  When  Paul  said,  "  When  Christ  who  is 
our  life  shall  appear^''  he  doubtless  referred  to  his  coming 
when  God  shall  "  be  all  in  all,"  and  I  said  so  in  my  first 
reply,  but  he  declared  I  referred  that  passage  to  his  com- 
ing in  his  kingdom.  He  also  misrepresented  me  in  his 
comments  on  Phil.  iii.  i8,  21.  I  told  him  that  the  com- 
in£f  to  "  changfe  our  vile  bodies"  referred  to  the  resurrcc- 


yudgment — Punishment.  407 

tion.  Why  did  he  thus  mistake  my  position  r  He  also 
misrepresented  Paul  in  saying  that  he  connected  the 
destruction  of  men  with  that  coming.  He  did  no  such 
a  thing,  as  the  passage  shows.  The  apostle  represents 
the  "enemies  of  the  cross"  as  then  living,  and  the  de- 
struction being  at  hand  when  he  wrote.  Men  can  be 
destroyed  this  side  of  the  resurrection.  He  pursued  the 
same  unfiir  course  when  speaking  about  i  Cor.  xv. 
Notwithstanding  I  had  told  him,  over  and  over  again, 
that  the  coming  spoken  of  there  referred  to  the  resurrec- 
tion, he  represents  me  as  teaching  that  that  coming  has 
taken  place.  I  am  amazed  that  he  should  do  so.  Per- 
haps he  had  no  other  way  of  filling  out  his  time.  He 
had  better  have  said  nothing.  He  also  affirmed,  that 
Paul  "connects  the  destruction  of  enemies"  with  that 
coming.  Yes,  he  does.  But  what  enemies?  Mr. 
Sweeney  says,  some  of  mankind.  Now  see  how  he 
errs.  "  Then  cometh  the  end,  when  he  shall  have 
delivered  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father;  when 
he  shall  have  put  down  all  rule,  and  all  authoritv,  and 
power.  For  he  must  reign'''  [that  is,  rule,  I'udge]  "till 
he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.  And  the  last 
enemy,  death,  shall  be  destroyed."  Observe,  the  apostle 
names  the  enemies  that  shall  be  destroyed  —  all  rule, 
authority,  power,  death.  Unfortunately  for  the  gentle- 
man's creed,  man  is  not  named.  It  is  also  unfortunate 
for  his  creed,  that  those  enemies  the  apostle  names  are 
to  be  DESTROYED,  ANNIHILATED,  for  he  bclieves  that 
evil  power,  evil  rule,  evil  authority,  and  death,  will  not 
be  destroyed,  but  will  reign  in  hell  eternally — reign  as 
long  as  God  reigns.  This  passage  is  a  complete  refuta- 
tion of  his  endless  misery  system.  In  the  same  connec- 
tion the  apostle  says,  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in 


4o8  Oral  Discussion. 

Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive,"  but  Mr.  Sweeney 
says,  none  will  be  in  Christ  save  the  little  squad  who  are 
immersed  in  water.  Again,  In  the  same  chapter,  "  All 
things  shall  be  subdued  unto  God,  *  *  that  God 
may  be  all  in  all."  Mr.  Sweeney  will  have  it,  that  only 
a  small  portion  of  all  things  will  be  subdued  to  God, 
and  that  God  never  will  be  all  in  all.  In  the  same  con- 
nection the  apostle  refutes  the  dogma,  that  coiTuptlon 
and  dishonor  will  be  raised  from  the  dead  to  debase  and 
degrade  millions  of  immortal  spirits  eternally.  "  It  is 
sown  in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in  incorruption.  It  is 
sown  in  dishonor,  it  is  raised  in  glory."  Dishonor  and 
corruption  will  be  burled,  to  rise  no  more  forever.  But 
Mr.  Sweeney  contends  there  will  be  a  resurrection  to 
coiTuption  and  dishonor,  and  God  will  perpetuate  them 
eternally. 

He  also  misrepresented  me  in  saying  I  referred  Acts' 
iii.  21,  where  Peter  speaks  of  the  "Restitution  of  all 
THINGS,"  to  Christ's  coming  in  his  kingdom.  He  knew 
better.  He  did  the  same  wicked  thing  in  his  remarks 
about  I  Thes.  iv.  13-17.  He  also,  contrary  to  ti'uth, 
stated  that  I  said  that  passage  is  "  figurative." 

Let  it  be  remembered,  that  when  Christ's  coming  is 
connected  with  the  resurrection,  the  future  state,  the 
restitution,  not  a  \vord  is  said  about  judgment  or 
PUNISHMENT.  Judgment  and  punishment  only  are  con- 
nected with  the  COMING  in  his  kingdom. 

He  read  what  Paul  said  about  the  "  crown  "  he  ex- 
pected to  receive  when  he  died.  But  according  to  the 
gentleman,  Paul  has  not  yet  been  crowned,  and  will  not 
be  till  the  future  judgment  he  talks  about.  Paul  expected 
to  be  crowned  on  the  day  of  his  death;  hence  he 
desired  "  to  depart  and  be  with  Christ."     The  righteous 


yudgment — P  unishmejit .  409 

Judge  would  then,  he  expected,  crown  hhn.  But  accord- 
ing to  my  friend,  Paul  was  to  be  in  the  ante-chamber 
several  thousand  years  waiting  for  his  crown!  What 
absurdities. 

He  again  read  the  passage  in  which  the  apostle  speaks 
of  judging  "quick  and  dead,"  and  remarked,  that  I 
quoted  "  Doctors"  who  said  saints  and  sinners  are  meant. 
One  of  them  is  the  apostle  Paul.  "  You  hath  he  quick- 
ened who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins."  When 
sinners  they  were  dead;  but  they  were  quickened  into 
spiritual  life. 

He  read  a  passage  that  speaks  of  God  being  able  to 
destroy  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna.  In  \\\\  last  reply  I 
showed  what  is  meant  by  Gehenna.,  and  he  made  no 
attempt  at  a  refutation.  John  said,  "God  is a^^A' of  these 
stones  to  raise  up  children  unto  Abraham,"  (Matt.  iii. 
9),  but  he  has  never  done  so.  So  God  is  able  to  anni- 
hilate soul  and  body  in  Gehenna  or  anywhere  else,  but 
I  have  no  evidence  that  he  has  annihilated  one  of 
Adam's  race. 

The  gentleman  has,  at  least,  two  hells  in  his  creed. 
Hell  No.  One  he  tells  us,  is  the  air,  the  atmosphere. 
The  Rich  Man  went  to  that  hell,  and,  as  he  met  Abra- 
ham there,  h-eaven,  too,  must  be  the  atmosphere.  The 
baptized  all  join  father  Abi*aham  in  air  when  they  get 
through  here;  and  the  unbaptized  join  the  Rich  Man. 
Both  parties  ai"e  neighbors  up  among  the  clouds,  where 
they  are  suspended,  perhaps,  by  balloons  tied  to  their 
heads  or  heels.  All  who  have  died  the  past  six  thousand 
years  are  up  there  in  the  atmospheric  heaven  or  hell, 
and  there  they  will  remain,  likely,  ten  times  six  thousand 
years  longer.  As  Paul  desired  "to  depart  and  be  with 
Christ,"  they,  too,  are  up  there  as  well  as  Abraham  and 


4IO 


Oral  Discussion. 


the  Rich  Man — if  the  gentleman  is  right.  He  thinks 
they  will  all  remain  thus  suspended  till  the  judgment 
day,  and  then  the  souls  in  the  air  and  the  bodies  in  the 
graves  will  be  reunited,  and  all  martialed  to  the  judg- 
ment seat.  Hell  No.  One  will  then  be  abandoned  and 
abolished,  and  the  unimmersed  will  be  cast  into  hell  No. 
Two  to  roast  eternally,  and  the  other  party  will  go  some- 
where else,  and  have  a  good  time  rejoicing  over  the 
damnation  of  their  unimmersed  fathers,  mothers,  chil- 
dren, brothers,  sisters,  husbands,  wives,  and  neighbors. 
If  he  replies,  they  will  not  rejoice  at  their  damnation,  I 
answer,  if  they  do  not  rejoice  they  must  be  indifferent  to 
their  condition,  or  weep  tears  of  intense  agony,  and  the 
latter  only  would  be  christian.  But  this  division  and 
damnation  of  mankind  is  all  a  fiction,  and  of  the  earth 
earthy.  In  the  words  of  Charles  Lamb,  the  immortal 
Essayist  and  Poet : 

"  Blessed  be  God, 
The  measure  of  his  judgment  is  not  fixed 
By  man's  erroneous  standard.      He  discerns 
No  such  inordinate  diflFerence  and  vast 
Betwixt  the  sinner  and  the  saint,  to  doom 
Such  disproportioned  fates." 

That  great   Poet  of  this  century,   Alfred   Tennyson, 
strikes  the  true  note : 

"Behold  !  we  know  not  anything; 
I  can  but  trust  that  good  shall  fall 
At  last — far  off — at  last  to  all, 
And  every  winter  changed  to  spring." 

***** 
"  That  God  which  ever  lives  and  loves, 
Oije  God,  one  law,  one  element. 
And  one  far-ofF,  divine  event 
To  which  the  whole  creation  moves. " 


yudgment — Punishment.  41 1 

I  wish  to  make  a  correction  before  I  close.  When 
discussing  the  first  proposition,  I  remarked  that  the 
Apostolic  Times  advocated  innate  depravity.  Subse- 
cjuent  reading"  has  convinced  me  I  was  mistaken,  and  I 
here  nialve  tlie  correction.  The  other  books  antl  papers 
of  my  friend's  denomination,  I  read  from,  clearly  teach 
all  that  was  attributed  to  them. 

I  thank  the  Moderators  for  their  kindness  and  atten- 
tion during  this  protracted  discussion.  May  they,  Brother 
Sweeney,  and  all  the  hearers,  be  profited  by  this  inves- 
tigation.    [  Time  expired. 


